Results 1 to 15 of 15

Thread: Mongols/Timurids are totally underpowered

  1. #1

    Default Mongols/Timurids are totally underpowered

    Starting with the Mongols, every other faction has better technology and horsearchers than them. It's simply ridiculous.
    Byzantine horsearchers are better. Turkish and egypt horsearcher are the same as horsearcher. And Russians have much heavier horsearchers.
    Even the heavy mongol cav is weaker than other eastern cav like that of the turkish/russian/egyptian factions.
    On top of that Horsearchers in general have less range than foot archers (WTF!?!).
    I also miss fast heavy cav for the mongols, cav like Conquistadores who are swift but still strong.
    Mongols were supposed to be mobile and not slow. The heavy cav of the mongols in the game slows the whole army down!

    The Timurids on the other hand can make up for their weaknesses (no crossbows, no musketeers, weak infantry) with 2 gun elephants.

    Because of that I go with the Timurids. But I still miss a heavy cav that is a bit lighter for more mobility.


    It's sad that the developers of Total War listen all the years to the millions of cry babies. It's because of this that total war is not as great and realistic as it should be.
    Last edited by PlautusLeo; March 09, 2015 at 04:53 AM.

  2. #2

    Default Re: Mongols/Timurids are totally underpowered

    What mod are you playing? You realize your particular problem is with the developers of the mod, not Total War (which is CA, Creative Assembly.) You should go to that mod's forum, as I'm sure if what you say is true it's been brought up before, and it's possible the mod team had a valid reason for doing so.

  3. #3

    Default Re: Mongols/Timurids are totally underpowered

    It's not a mod. It's the vanilla game.
    "You realize your particular problem is with the developers of the mod, not Total War (which is CA, Creative Assembly.)"
    Last edited by Gigantus; March 09, 2015 at 11:03 PM. Reason: thou shalt not insult

  4. #4
    UndrState's Avatar Centenarius
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Location
    Montreal, QC, Canada
    Posts
    851

    Default Re: Mongols/Timurids are totally underpowered

    Quote Originally Posted by PlautusLeo View Post
    It's not a mod. It's the vanilla game.
    "You realize your particular problem is with the developers of the mod, not Total War (which is CA, Creative Assembly.)"

    If you are playing as the Mongols or the Timurids, you're playing a modded game. You said:

    Quote Originally Posted by PlautusLeo View Post
    Because of that I go with the Timurids. But I still miss a heavy cav that is a bit lighter for more mobility.
    Which gives a definite impression that you are playing a modded game, and certainly justifies CavalryCmdr's comment.

    This is the 2nd time I've seen you insult someone, recently, when you are clearly in the wrong.

    EDIT: Clearly I'm wrong to say that you are clearly wrong, but for the love of god please stop insulting ppl.
    Last edited by Gigantus; March 09, 2015 at 11:04 PM. Reason: continuity

  5. #5

    Default Re: Mongols/Timurids are totally underpowered

    S/he could be playing multiplayer and/or custom battles as the Mongols or Timurids without modding; there was nothing saying that it was a single-player campaign game.
    ೋღ☃ღೋ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ Repost this if~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
    ~you are a beautiful strong Catholic monarch~ ~
    ~ ~who don’t need no communion with Rome~ ~

  6. #6
    Boogie Knight's Avatar Biarchus
    Join Date
    Jun 2014
    Location
    The Kingdom of Mercia
    Posts
    631

    Default Re: Mongols/Timurids are totally underpowered

    Quote Originally Posted by PlautusLeo View Post
    It's sad that the developers of Total War listen all the years to the millions of cry babies. It's because of this that total war is not as great and realistic as it should be.
    Which crybabies are you talking about, exactly? I'm fairly certain the Mongols and Timurids were this strong on release; I don't think it was a playerbase-driven campaign to nerf them via patch that has made them this way, although I could be wrong about that. Or were they perhaps stronger in Med1 (did they appear in that? I only played Med1 very briefly). Given the excessive stack-spam these factions emerge with, it makes sense for their units to be a tad weaker than the units of the factions that will have to face them from the word go. If all the Mongols' and Timurids' units were more powerful than those of the Turks/Egyptians/Russians etc., then the player would have to compensate with numbers that were superior to the countless thousands the emergent factions show up with. And if the player tried that, then they would very quickly sink their economy in ~99.99% of cases.

  7. #7
    UndrState's Avatar Centenarius
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Location
    Montreal, QC, Canada
    Posts
    851

    Default Re: Mongols/Timurids are totally underpowered

    Quote Originally Posted by Maklodes View Post
    S/he could be playing multiplayer and/or custom battles as the Mongols or Timurids without modding; there was nothing saying that it was a single-player campaign game.
    Fair point, but you can see how someone's mind might go there, and no one deserves to be insulted for that.

  8. #8

    Default Re: Mongols/Timurids are totally underpowered

    Quote Originally Posted by PlautusLeo View Post
    Starting with the Mongols, every other faction has better technology and horsearchers than them. It's simply ridiculous.
    Byzantine horsearchers are better. Turkish and egypt horsearcher are the same as horsearcher. And Russians have much heavier horsearchers.
    Byzantine and Russian horse archers (Dvor and Vardariotai) are probably better. Mongol heavy horse archers and mamluk archers are pretty much identical, although the Mongols are more disciplined and hardier, while the mamluk archers are capable of formed charges. Turkish Sipahis are, I'd say, fairly unquestionably worse (except for being cheaper).

    Quote Originally Posted by PlautusLeo View Post
    Even the heavy mongol cav is weaker than other eastern cav like that of the turkish/russian/egyptian factions.
    Khan's Guard seems to be just about the best heavy cavalry around. Qapukulu has a very slight edge in having one extra point of shield, but I'd say they probably outlcass Royal Mamluks. Tsars Guard is a little different, with unusually high defensive skills but not armor piercing ability, but I'd hardly say it's clearly superior. Then there's the fact that Mongols and Timurids have the best general's bodyguards in the game.

    Quote Originally Posted by PlautusLeo View Post
    On top of that Horsearchers in general have less range than foot archers (WTF!?!).
    What's WTF about that? I think that the ability of capable foot archers, capable of drawing more powerful bows with steadier aim, to generally outrange their mounted counterparts is reasonably well attested in sources from the Tactica of Leo the Wise to Archer Jones' Art of War. (You can even find it in Herodotus's account of Darius's failed invasion of the Scythians. (Histories Book IV.)

    Quote Originally Posted by PlautusLeo View Post
    I also miss fast heavy cav for the mongols, cav like Conquistadores who are swift but still strong.
    Mongols were supposed to be mobile and not slow. The heavy cav of the mongols in the game slows the whole army down!
    It doesn't slow them down on the campaign map, at least, because all cavalry moves equally quickly on the campaign map. Although it is true that the Mongols don't have any quick melee cavalry other than light lancers, who are kind of mediocre. Overall, I'd say that it is true that neither the Mongols nor the Timurids have particularly richly developed unit rosters (but they do better than some factions, like Scotland).

    Quote Originally Posted by PlautusLeo View Post
    The Timurids on the other hand can make up for their weaknesses (no crossbows, no musketeers, weak infantry) with 2 gun elephants.

    Because of that I go with the Timurids. But I still miss a heavy cav that is a bit lighter for more mobility.

    It's sad that the developers of Total War listen all the years to the millions of cry babies. It's because of this that total war is not as great and realistic as it should be.
    In the campaign, the Mongols and Timurids are both given a number of advantages -- free maintenance units, high experience, excellent leadership, vast numbers, highly coordinated strategic use of stacks -- which make them both quite formidable adversaries. In custom/multiplayer battles, it's a more level playing field. I'd still hardly say they're underpowered. Rules for multiplayer are often designed thwart Mongol/Timurid strengths in gameplay, like "No arti/no elephants/max 4 cav." Now, Mongols or Timurids who do abide by these rules can indeed find themselves at a disadvantage, but I think the very fact that people feel the need for these types of social rules to curb this type of army indicates that it is a powerful -- indeed, probably overpowered -- option. After all, if the game were perfectly balanced, someone loading up on horse archers, lancers, and elephants might have a winning army -- or might have an army doomed to flounder against someone else's (for example) Portuguese pike-and-crossbow infantry oriented army that is perfect for beating it.

    Realistically, I think that most people would not say that the Mongol's advantages were that their archers could shoot further than a typical Turkish archer, or that their lancers had better armor than those of the Jurchens. It was their unique system of organization, their intelligence operations, their use of psychological warfare, and their tactics that gave them an edge. In short, their realistic advantages, while not easily represented within the mechanics of TW, are better represented on the campaign map with things like high-command, high-dread generals (as they are), than with a Mongol horse archer simply being superior to his Magyar counterpart.
    ೋღ☃ღೋ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ Repost this if~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
    ~you are a beautiful strong Catholic monarch~ ~
    ~ ~who don’t need no communion with Rome~ ~

  9. #9

    Default Re: Mongols/Timurids are totally underpowered

    What crap are you guys talking about? I am talking about the UNITS, jesus lord.
    And I didn't mention any mod. So many replies already and nobody talked about the topic. Fail!

  10. #10
    Silverheart's Avatar Domesticus
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Location
    Sweden
    Posts
    2,388

    Default Re: Mongols/Timurids are totally underpowered

    Quote Originally Posted by PlautusLeo View Post
    What crap are you guys talking about? I am talking about the UNITS, jesus lord.
    And I didn't mention any mod. So many replies already and nobody talked about the topic. Fail!
    Maklodes gave a pretty good and encompassing answer, I´d say.
    I agree with pretty much everything he said, except for the Mongol/Timurid Bodyguard units being the strongest - if that really is so, then I haven´t really experienced their superiority to the Bodyguards of other factions (or is it a stat-related thing? I´ll admit I haven´t checked that )
    Last edited by Silverheart; March 09, 2015 at 03:33 PM.
    Heart of silver, Mind of gold
    Fist of iron and Tongue to scold

    Proud to be a Viking!

  11. #11

    Default Re: Mongols/Timurids are totally underpowered

    Quote Originally Posted by Silverheart View Post
    Maklodes gave a pretty good and encompassing answer, I´d say.
    I agree with pretty much everything he said, except for the Mongol/Timurid Bodyguard units being the strongest - if that really is so, then I haven´t really experienced their superiority to the Bodyguards of other factions (or is it a stat-related thing? I´ll admit I haven´t checked that )
    For reference, Bodyguards of M2TW:
    Aztec
    Byzantine
    Mongol
    Muslim
    Northern Catholic
    Russian
    Southern Catholic

    Most bodyguards are only trained, whereas Byzantine and Mongol bodyguards are highly trained. In addition Mongol bodyguards have armor piercing secondary weapons, which other bodyguards don't. (Admittedly, Muslim and Russian bodyguards have slightly higher total defense, but only by a point, and Mongol bodyguards are tied with Byzantines and beat Catholics.)
    Last edited by Maklodes; March 09, 2015 at 04:13 PM.
    ೋღ☃ღೋ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ Repost this if~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
    ~you are a beautiful strong Catholic monarch~ ~
    ~ ~who don’t need no communion with Rome~ ~

  12. #12

    Default Re: Mongols/Timurids are totally underpowered

    Sorry,
    The heavy cav of the mongols in the game slows the whole army down!
    indicated to me that you were referring to campaign map as in battle it has no effect on the "whole" army unless you choose to (which obviously is not really much of a choice.)

    For archers, foot archers do an should have longer range then horse archers, to go otherwise is ridiculous. That said, Mongol horn bows used by their cavalry should have significantly better range then the compound bows used by their middle-east counter parts, and perhaps even equal that of lesser foot archers. However this is slightly evened by the fact that the Mongol horses are as fast as the Turkish, both tied as the fastest (with a couple others) where historically the Turks had by far the faster horses. Finally, I believe you are definitely correct about the Mongol heavy cavalry, to be honest it looks like they appointed the wrong horse to them, they are not nearly heavily armored enough to warrant that slow of a horse.

  13. #13
    nhinhonhinho's Avatar Domesticus
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    Việt Nam (Vietnam). Hồ Chí Minh city
    Posts
    2,344

    Default Re: Mongols/Timurids are totally underpowered

    Trust me, most people said the Mongol are overpower at least in vanilla. Individually their units may be outclass by a few best units but overall their army was well balanced and formidable, not to say most of their missile units are also hybrid units.

    For the Timurid, a couple of Elephants of any kind will most likely turn the battle to the one side slaughter. Without elephant they still as good as the Mongol (All of the 'heavy... are there) with a few cheap and weak Muslim troops to add more flavor

  14. #14

    Default Re: Mongols/Timurids are totally underpowered

    To all moderators: Feel free to close this conversation.
    Last edited by TheDarkKnight; March 10, 2015 at 01:39 PM.

  15. #15
    TheDarkKnight's Avatar Compliance will be rewarded
    Moderator Emeritus Content Emeritus Administrator Emeritus

    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Location
    The good (not South) part of the USA
    Posts
    11,632
    Blog Entries
    12

    Default Re: Mongols/Timurids are totally underpowered

    Closed per request
    Things I trust more than American conservatives:

    Drinks from Bill Cosby, Flint Michigan tap water, Plane rides from Al Qaeda, Anything on the menu at Chipotle, Medical procedures from Mengele

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •