Sarranid Mameluke is overpowered.

[lilyeti]

Anyone else think so?

I have an army of 50 Khergits. About 15 of them are lancers, the rest are a mixture of horsemen and skirmishers. I attack a Sarranid lord with an army of 40 Sarranids, they only have 5 mamelukes. The battles starts, and We pretty much dominate their infantry and archers, loosing just 3 troops. Then we go to chase down the mamelukes. The 4 mamelukes that are left end up killing 16 of my troops, turning small losses, into 1/3 of my army.

Mabey I should have upgraded some troops into horse archers instead of lancers, since they obviously can't compete with the mamelukes in melee.

 

[Asphe]

I think Mamlukes are the best balanced of the three heavy cavalry troop types (once you have reached the final tier, that is) but I do not see them as overpowered. I have no qualms attacking someone with a lot of Mamlukes. My last two full games had me taking over the Sarranids, which meant pitting the other two Knight troops against Mamlukes.

You probably had a run of bad luck and the Mamlukes spawn were all on warhorses, wearing mamluke armor and sporting good weapons. Hopefully in WB2 we can outfit our troops as we do Companions now.

 

[Urgnot]

Mamlukes are indeed a pain, especially since for some reason a lord carries atleast 5+ wherever he goes. There is no real defence against them except keeping your forces tight, having a Mamluke vs 1 of your troops will end bad for your troop. Use more defensive tactics perhaps.

 

[Mastermind]

They are slightly overpowered. They seem to be a tad stronger than Swadian Knights, and unless they changed it in the recent patches, easier to get.
But this has been discussed so often that it gets boring.
My solution is: Give them desert horses.

 

[Calaran]

lancers < all other knights and mamlukes in close combat, so its a bad matchup. i know cos i use mamelukes to fight khergits. friggin turkey shoot i tell you.

but the difference between a knight and a mameluke isnt that big. you jst need some knights, or better still, some mamelukes of your own to even the odds. i havent tried it myself, but i think horse archers wont be much of a improvement. and even if it does work, your fights will be prolonged like crazy with your archers running from them and missing their few pot shots.

 

[mrdang]

they're much more consistently armored than the other knights (guaranteed mamluke guard mail and veiled helmet). heavier than vaegirs and a tad stronger than swadians (1 more point to power strike). in lord parties, they have an abnormally high presence compared to knights for other factions, and horsemen of their own--you'll rarely see sarranid horsemen. their wages are lower.

just like any cavalry, the best defense is to kill them yourself--dont let anyone else get their hands on that 244xp

i wish other faction lords would carry the same amount of elite tier units.

 

[Thundertrod]

I eddited there wepon skill from 150 to 130 same has the swaden knight that seems to help.
Before I just made a point to lance the Mameluke's my self right at the start of the battel.

Or shoot them first in a sidge, Takes three steel bolts from a sidge crossbow but saves a good five of my troops.

 

[Calaran]

yea. thats the crazy part. their awesome in sieges too. i havent taken a look at their stats, but it wont surprise me if they can match huscarls on foot.

 

[luisedgm]

How to deal with mamlukes:

1. get a masterwork bow and a charger
2. level up horse archery skills
3. get ready and find sarranid lord
4. when battle starts rush into the enemy line, get behind them
5. while they are still organizating their formation start headshoting all mamlukes
6. the survivors will rage and go after you, shot the horses because their shield is an arrow magnet and finish them later
7. ???
8. profit

 

[ryaad]

trust me they cant match nord hurscals on foot

 

[Galdus]

Anyone else think so?

I have an army of 50 Khergits. About 15 of them are lancers, the rest are a mixture of horsemen and skirmishers. I attack a Sarranid lord with an army of 40 Sarranids, they only have 5 mamelukes. The battles starts, and We pretty much dominate their infantry and archers, loosing just 3 troops. Then we go to chase down the mamelukes. The 4 mamelukes that are left end up killing 16 of my troops, turning small losses, into 1/3 of my army.

Mabey I should have upgraded some troops into horse archers instead of lancers, since they obviously can't compete with the mamelukes in melee.

Khergit's are weak in comparasion to any other Cavalry. I checked the stats of all of them,Khergits are like the balanced cav. They all have ranged weapons so there use best on flat ground where you Skirmish back and open a steady stream of fire and once the enemy is close enough you fall back once again until your confident you can annihilate the lines with no casualty's. It's funny there called "Lancers" and they use war-spears most of the time. Anyways Mamelukes compared to light cavalry would seem overpowered.

 

[Calaran]

trust me they cant match nord hurscals on foot

true that. went to do a small comparison just for fun.

Huscarl:
60 health
8 Agi
Powerstrike 7
Powerthrow 5
Shield 5
Athletics 6
Weapon Proficiencies 145 in all weapons

Mameluke:
58 health
9 Agi
Powerstrike 5
Shield 3
Weapon Proficiencies 150 in single, 130 in double, 140 in pole.

In terms of armor, the huscarl seems to be slightly better too with exception of the helmet. the nord huscarl helmet is jst 40 armor.

i will say 1 thing about mamelukes that i prefer to huscarls. they carry shields most of the time, together with a pole or single-handed. whereas huscarls seem to love their 2handed axes... very very bad feeling to see a few huscarls with no shields at the front of a siege force. after all the time and money you take to train them and they refuse to make use of their shield 5 to block a few arrows...

 

[Nahkuri]

What's odd about Mamlukes being so powerful is that they're tier 5. They're as easily trained as Swadian men-at-arms, but at least equals to Swadian knights. That's a bit off, I think.

 

[Knight of the Rose]

I think they are fine.  I was steam rolling most armies with my Swadian Knights until I clashed with these bad boys,  now I finally have opponents who can actually kill my knights.

 

[ryaad]

trust me they cant match nord hurscals on foot

true that. went to do a small comparison just for fun.

Huscarl:
60 health
8 Agi
Powerstrike 7
Powerthrow 5
Shield 5
Athletics 6
Weapon Proficiencies 145 in all weapons

Mameluke:
58 health
9 Agi
Powerstrike 5
Shield 3
Weapon Proficiencies 150 in single, 130 in double, 140 in pole.

In terms of armor, the huscarl seems to be slightly better too with exception of the helmet. the nord huscarl helmet is jst 40 armor.

i will say 1 thing about mamelukes that i prefer to huscarls. they carry shields most of the time, together with a pole or single-handed. whereas huscarls seem to love their 2handed axes... very very bad feeling to see a few huscarls with no shields at the front of a siege force. after all the time and money you take to train them and they refuse to make use of their shield 5 to block a few arrows...

really? mine always use their sheilds

 

[Noapte]

What's odd about Mamlukes being so powerful is that they're tier 5. They're as easily trained as Swadian men-at-arms, but at least equals to Swadian knights. That's a bit off, I think.

Took the thoughts outta my mind.

 

[Calaran]

trust me they cant match nord hurscals on foot

true that. went to do a small comparison just for fun.

Huscarl:
60 health
8 Agi
Powerstrike 7
Powerthrow 5
Shield 5
Athletics 6
Weapon Proficiencies 145 in all weapons

Mameluke:
58 health
9 Agi
Powerstrike 5
Shield 3
Weapon Proficiencies 150 in single, 130 in double, 140 in pole.

In terms of armor, the huscarl seems to be slightly better too with exception of the helmet. the nord huscarl helmet is jst 40 armor.

i will say 1 thing about mamelukes that i prefer to huscarls. they carry shields most of the time, together with a pole or single-handed. whereas huscarls seem to love their 2handed axes... very very bad feeling to see a few huscarls with no shields at the front of a siege force. after all the time and money you take to train them and they refuse to make use of their shield 5 to block a few arrows...

really? mine always use their sheilds

yes really. you either dont field many of them, or your extremely lucky. to be precise though in case you misunderstand, i didnt mean that they dont make use of their shield, i meant some of them dont carry shields at all. "they refuse to make use of their shield 5" is in reference to their 5 pts in shield skill, not the presence of a shield.

 

[Seawied86]

Mamlukes are a bit strong.

And lancers are a bit weak to be honest.


Despite being weaker in hand to hand combat, lancer's make up for this by being able to use a bow, making them a bit more versatile.



The main problem with mamlukes, as other have said, is that they are too easily trained. In addtion, they also are a lot cheaper than Swadian Knights, making a whole army of them easier to maintain.

 

[LordOfWar]

guys those Mamelukes were trained from 6 years old on every thing in combat they are combat professions, this is for the history part.
as for the game i beat them too many times with Swadian knights as for other faction i don't know.
to beat them just try to flank them and raise your shield and one handed sword.
note: i didn't lose any battle against them.
actually try to add some Mameluke to your army they are good.
 

 

[AWdeV]

They're good, but not frighteningly so. They seem to spawn with lances more often than, say, Swadian knights. Doesn't necessarily mean they're overpowered though. A thundering charge from Swadian knights is just as effective, possibly even more so. Swadian Knights also handle themselves better on foot/against armour, due to the prevalence of morning stars.