Mounted samurai IMPLEMENTED

[DreJaDe]

@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.

That's just too costly for it to be used unless the stats would be buffed.

Well, they did have heavy cav I think but I want a more usable one.

In suggesting this, I want to consider if players would even use this unit or not and 5 turn simply doesn't cut it for me. Just like how yabusame is heavily unusable.

[Endru1241]

If yabusame is too weak - please create topic dedicated to it in balancing subforum (or bundled with some similar units by some common parameter).
As for stats for mounted samurai - I think cavalry with 2 attacks, even with 8-9 power would be better to cost 5 turns. Could have some more hp then if assigned medium or heavy cat.
Btw. If it had such attack, 2 actions, 25hp, 4 cost and light cavalry category it would be totally op. Why use knight, when there is unit with the same cost, same bonuses, higher damage output and only taking 7 instead of 11 archer attacks, 4 instead of 7 swordsman attacks, but actually more resistant towards anti-mounted units? Even on endgame the attack is 10x2 so damage vs hoplite gets the same (on start is slightly better), but against any medium, light infantry or archers is vastly superior while not investing any research. And that doesn't count japanese benefits.
And such low hp medium or heavy cavalry would too easily be one shoted , which I am trying to avoid, especially in units costing >2.

[DreJaDe]

I actually thought that light cavalry can be one shotted by anti cavalry. Also, I didn't notice that knights are actually heavy cav. I think they could be categorized as medium cavalry then.

It's hp and armor is weaker than by 2 so it's actually more beatable than the knight. If I'm not wrong that does mean while it's the same with knight with cost, mounted samurai takes more damage. Combo units would also beat mounted samurai easier because of this.

With its small damage I thought that it will be countered more by armor unlike the knight with its high damage (enemy armor would be triggered twice since 2 atks will be done) And knights are more tanky than this unit so taking that account will make them equal in different use.

Knight vs mounted samurai would still be on the side of knights even without it's upg.

Maybe something like this
Category: Medium Cavalry
Cost: 4
Hp: 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

With this stats a combo of spearman and other infantry could easily counter this unit.

Peirce/melee armor is lower than hussar with 5 turn cost and lower than knight with the same cost.

It's actually just the same but with just med cav category added.

[Endru1241]

Finally implemented.