Some reflections about mounted units

[morchuflex]

I would suggest one more small one. I made my Keshik a 4.2.3, for both a historical reason, and because I thought the UU needed some kind of a boost.

I agree the Keshik needed a boost. But since I refuse to give more than 2 mps to any mounted unit, I rather chosed to give it an enhanced attack (to reflect Mongol fierceness), a reduced defence (these guys were light cavalry compared to european knights) and increased mobility through the ability to treat hills and mountains as grassland.

 

[Aegis]

Morchuflex, if I may please state my opinion. You slowed down the Ansar warrior and increased it's cost, making it an obviously worse choice than a standard knight.

Would it not be better to cheapen the Ansar warrior since it is not as good as a regular knight? I do not believe giving it the blitz ability offsets it's defensive loss and increased cost.

With the Russian Cossack, you slowed it down, it maintained it's blitz, yet you decreased it's cost.

I think it would be best to do the same to the Ansar warrior.

 

[morchuflex]

@ Aegis:

1. I think the blitz ability is worth more than you think. Furthermore, a cost of 70 is just that of generic knights.
2. The same reasoning applies to the Cossack: in my mod, it's just a "standard" cavalry but with blitz ability. So it costs the same as cavalry. Furthermore, the Russians already suck. I don't want to put any extra charge on them.

 

[Aegis]

Ah, ok. It was the cost difference between them and the Cossack which raised my eyebrow.