Mounted samurai IMPLEMENTED

[Badnorth]

The Samurai became expert in fighting from horseback and on the ground. They practiced armed and un-armed combat.
Cost: 5
Hp: 26
Att: 11
Spd: 5
Armor: 2/2
Sight: 5
SR: 50%
Bonuses:
75% Medium foot melee
75% Light foot melee
75% Siege machines

Affected by bushido aura

[Badnorth]

Changes +

[Endru1241]

No banner. It's reserved for commanding units with some aura.
As for stats - unique. That I can admit. or
Weak on defensive side against anything that has bonus vs mounted (one-shoted by halberdier, +2 from blacksmith or buffs spearman or +1 pikeman).
Very powerful attacking side - 19 damage x2 for lighter melee - truly an infantry sweeper.
Lack of additional knight bonuses is perfectly ok with 2x11 power attack.
I only wonder if it's not too powerful counter vs lighter infantry - without any research it can kill 2 core army units costing 2 in one turn. Knight needs upgrade or +2 bonus to achieve it vs one unit. Maybe regular +50% bonus would fit better - it gives 16 power.
Or totally change the concept towards more known heavy cavalry stats - give more hp, lesser attack (if two attacks are retained) and regular cavalry bonus (+50% vs melee foot, ranged, siege, +100% vs armored siege ).

[Badnorth]

Or totally change the concept towards more known heavy cavalry stats - give more hp, lesser attack (if two attacks are retained) and regular cavalry bonus (+50% vs melee foot, ranged, siege, +100% vs armored siege ).

I'd go with this , as heavy cavalry would sound great.

[Badnorth]

Heavy cavalry type stats:
Cost: 5
Hp: 30
Att: 8
Spd: 5
Armor: 2/2
Sight: 5
Bonuses:
50% Ranged
50% Foot melee
50% Siege machines
100% Armored Siege machines
Affected by bushido aura
Like this?

[Badnorth]

I just added banner because many sources has banner

Some slight changes and shading.

[Endru1241]

Many drawings would show banner, because it was one of the main means of communication on the battlefield.
Knight/samurai/unit leader typically were known only by it's retainers, direct lord, few other nobility tied by family or buisness. But for the rest they had to somehow show - "we are on the same side". Sometimes it was also important, that others new who exactly made achievements, thus personal signs of various kinds (european heraldy).
Banner was also very convienient in sending messeges to your own people or alies - there could be known actions done with it signyfiying some orders/requests.

But we don't really present retainers in AoS.
The most basic element of the game is already a unit.
It's sort of underliying meaning, that training knight unit player gets knight, squire and some retainers. That swordsmen unit is actually a group equipped with various weapons and some siege tools.
That is one of the main reasons why I am often against giving too personal abilities, making stats based on appearance of sprites etc.

[Badnorth]

Thamks for the explanation,no signs it is.
Do you agree/disagree about the stats?

[Endru1241]

Almost.
I would set for 8-9 power - it's still powerful, taking into account the fact, that it's affected by blacksmith. 8 power makes 10x2 vs knight 16 on late game - better power with better utility (e.g. finishing units).
Bonuses sets off the armor increases
9 power would set this unit on even the stronger side. It would be equal to the knight line without the need to invest much (so not good).
As cavalry was not very common on japanese lands (too much mountainous, forest terrain) 8 seems perfect.

[Badnorth]

Okay,updated

[DreJaDe]

Don't really know what to name it but it's basically a mounted samurai

Cost:4
Health:28
Range:1
Damage:8
Armor:1/2
Turns:2
Speed:5

Bonus
50% against infantry
100% seige

[Hyuhjhih]

Cost »5
Bonus 50% ranged

Don't really know what to name it but it's basically a mounted samurai

Mounted samurai is good.

[Badnorth]

Cost »5
Bonus 50% ranged

Don't really know what to name it but it's basically a mounted samurai

Mounted samurai is good.

Mounted samurai is already a topic.

[DreJaDe]

Cost »5
Bonus 50% ranged

Don't really know what to name it but it's basically a mounted samurai

Mounted samurai is good.

Mounted samurai is already a topic.

To hyu, I really want to retain it's 4 turn so that it can be practical to use ingame. Since this won't receive blacksmith, it's weaker than a knight if the knight receive it's +1 dmg upg. And even without it will struggle with the counter damage of knight that it will need to sustain with its weaker health.

Even if this unit can receive blacksmith buff it's still not that worth to be 5 turns.

To quad

Saw it.

What if the OG one can be a 2atk version of Japanese spear cav

Then this one could be a katana version

And since the other look more good, this came be just the weaker version.

Also
Can you merge it?

[Badnorth]

No, that reply is for hyu not for the actual topic.
But it can be with mounted samurai, since they are samurai afterall.

Dunno how to merge. Not a mod.

[DreJaDe]

This looks like a super ready to be implemented

Just wondering why it's not

[DreJaDe]

But it can be with mounted samurai, since they are samurai afterall.

Wdym by it can be with the mounted samurai?

[Badnorth]

Endru says that a unit shouldn't be always seen as an individual, it can be a group of units with different weaponry. So I meant that katana cavalry can be the same as mounted samurai unit.

[Endru1241]

Merged.

[DreJaDe]

Oh no.

Quad said that mounted samurai is different than this.

Can this still be implemented though?

The Japanese needs a good cavalry that will be more cheap than the daimyo because that is too costly. IRL some clans have a good cavalry but even some without a good one have atleast a thousand which is already big.

[Morningwarrior]

Normally samurais use thing similar to a glaive,but,he use to a spear or a great katana,glaive mounted samurai is a short future.

[DreJaDe]

I just found out that the Japanese cavalry are used more as light shock cavalry rather than the Europeans heavy use of heavy cav.

So maybe this unit could be a light cav?

[Badnorth]

Can fit as a light cav? I think so.
Needs new stats if considered. Probably similar to hussar.

[Endru1241]

So, rather medium cavalry.

[DreJaDe]

Okay, here a new stats
Cost: 4
Hp: 24-26
Att: 8
Spd: 5
Turn: 2
Armor: 0/1
Sight: 6
Bonuses:
50% Ranged
50% Foot melee
50% Siege machines
100% Armored Siege machines
Affected by bushido aura

I think hussars, or the ingame polish hussar is more used as a main attacker but the Japanese one are more used like skirmishers. They just attack to help the infantry. More as a support of their infantry.

[Endru1241]

In my view, which is based on real historical classification:
Light cavalry - scouts, horse archers, raiders (those responsible for attacking suppliers, fields, villages) or some specialized in pursuits. Any cavalry units, that lack the shock value, either by insufficient weapons, armor, horses, organisation, training or numbers.
Heavy cavalry - ot should be any cavalry that can create tight formation charge, like wedge, even on the start of battle, but I created additional category, that is rarely used historically just to put there some exclusions.
Medium cavalry - mainly created for any hybrid light/heavy or lacking some distinctive features of one of them. It hosts cavalry capable of charges, but much less reliant on armor and tight formations. Those units should have either power, hp or armor lower than heavy cavalry on similar cost (including research cost).
It also contains cavalry used for moping/pursuing, that is definitely heavier than light cavalry. Balance wise it could be said that medium cavalry is a buff if recategorised from heavy and a nerf if changed from light.
And I actually wonder if slow charge heavy cavalry shouldn't be seen as another category - like super heavy or so.

[DreJaDe]

In my view, which is based on real historical classification:
Light cavalry - scouts, horse archers, raiders (those responsible for attacking suppliers, fields, villages) or some specialized in pursuits. Any cavalry units, that lack the shock value, either by insufficient weapons, armor, horses, organisation, training or numbers.
Heavy cavalry - ot should be any cavalry that can create tight formation charge, like wedge, even on the start of battle, but I created additional category, that is rarely used historically just to put there some exclusions.
Medium cavalry - mainly created for any hybrid light/heavy or lacking some distinctive features of one of them. It hosts cavalry capable of charges, but much less reliant on armor and tight formations. Those units should have either power, hp or armor lower than heavy cavalry on similar cost (including research cost).
It also contains cavalry used for moping/pursuing, that is definitely heavier than light cavalry. Balance wise it could be said that medium cavalry is a buff if recategorised from heavy and a nerf if changed from light.
And I actually wonder if slow charge heavy cavalry shouldn't be seen as another category - like super heavy or so.

Hmm, I actually don't understand that much what's written there but here's my thoughts.

It seems that the Japanese did indeed use formation but not as big as the other countries. its so small that it won't make any difference unless supported by infantry.

Japanes tend to also use their cavalry indeed as you mentioned in the light one, for raiding and scouting.

The one clan that is famous for their cavalry, the Takeda is not what I'm trying to present which is used more as for charging rather, I want it to be the more commonly used form by many Japanese clans.

I'm not really good in history but I made some small research about it.

[Morningwarrior]

In my view, which is based on real historical classification:
Light cavalry - scouts, horse archers, raiders (those responsible for attacking suppliers, fields, villages) or some specialized in pursuits. Any cavalry units, that lack the shock value, either by insufficient weapons, armor, horses, organisation, training or numbers.
Heavy cavalry - ot should be any cavalry that can create tight formation charge, like wedge, even on the start of battle, but I created additional category, that is rarely used historically just to put there some exclusions.
Medium cavalry - mainly created for any hybrid light/heavy or lacking some distinctive features of one of them. It hosts cavalry capable of charges, but much less reliant on armor and tight formations. Those units should have either power, hp or armor lower than heavy cavalry on similar cost (including research cost).
It also contains cavalry used for moping/pursuing, that is definitely heavier than light cavalry. Balance wise it could be said that medium cavalry is a buff if recategorised from heavy and a nerf if changed from light.
And I actually wonder if slow charge heavy cavalry shouldn't be seen as another category - like super heavy or so.

Is like light,medium and heavy tanks modern class right?

[Morningwarrior]

In my view, which is based on real historical classification:
Light cavalry - scouts, horse archers, raiders (those responsible for attacking suppliers, fields, villages) or some specialized in pursuits. Any cavalry units, that lack the shock value, either by insufficient weapons, armor, horses, organisation, training or numbers.
Heavy cavalry - ot should be any cavalry that can create tight formation charge, like wedge, even on the start of battle, but I created additional category, that is rarely used historically just to put there some exclusions.
Medium cavalry - mainly created for any hybrid light/heavy or lacking some distinctive features of one of them. It hosts cavalry capable of charges, but much less reliant on armor and tight formations. Those units should have either power, hp or armor lower than heavy cavalry on similar cost (including research cost).
It also contains cavalry used for moping/pursuing, that is definitely heavier than light cavalry. Balance wise it could be said that medium cavalry is a buff if recategorised from heavy and a nerf if changed from light.
And I actually wonder if slow charge heavy cavalry shouldn't be seen as another category - like super heavy or so.

Is like light,medium and heavy tanks modern class right?

Just a exemple

[Endru1241]

@DreJaDe
The fact that japan saw light cavalry usage is without question.
Especially early mounted samurai archers, represented as yabusame.
However heavy cavalry is up to discussion.
There were even theories, that japanese didn't have heavy cavalry at all, but concluded to be fake by recent research.
So it seems heavy cavalry were rare and more commonly used only by few clans. Possibly only after mongol invasion.
But they did exist.
So I'd just represent it in the game as pricier unit with not that many advantages ( cost 5 would fit as it's the same as yabusame).
My main point is - I don't really know their cavalry well enough to make a decision if they should be classified as heavy in game or left with weaker stats, but medium category.

@Morningwarrior
Well, if by modern you mean ww2 up to 60' time then yes.
This day tanks are mostly main battle tanks (universal tanks), that cannot fit in any category, having advantages of all three.