Ideas on Providing Identity for Slavs, Persians, and Sicilians
- This topic has 27 replies, 1 voice, and was last updated 1 year, 6 months ago by
.
-
Posts
-
Yesterday, the consensus was that Slavs and Persians are seen as ‘bland’ civilizations.Some suggestions have been made to change these civilizations and also Sicilians, which have unexplored uniqueness.
For Slavs, free blacksmith infantry armor technologies have been proposed along with the removal of Fervor and the introduction of monk movement increased by 25%.
Additionally, the cost of the supplies technology is no longer free.
The problem with the Slavs’ infantry is that it is generic until you research Druzhina.
The suggested changes could boost M@a openings with free armor, and the Monk changes would mainly affect Relic picking.
The proposed Slav changes would provide them with an identity and recover one of their themes which is the Arena potential.
Persians, on the other hand, don’t have unique openings, follow-ups, or Castle Age powers but are good in terms of Team Game potentials.
A new Imperial Age Unique Tech called Aspabarak has been proposed, which would give Cavalry Archers +3 melee armor.
This would allow Persians to play the Hussar + HCA combo, with your HCA being less dangerous due to lack of attack/range but also more resilient to melee units.
Finally, for Sicilians, the cost of the Serjeant has been reduced from 60F 35G to 55F 35G.
Donjon now counts as a Feudal Age building for Castle Age advance unlock, and Barracks technologies (not unit upgrades) can be researched at Donjons.
These changes could make Serjeants more viable, create unique gameplay and restore the identity of the civ.
I like the Slavs changes – but maybe free Fervor instead of +25% faster?
Throw in free Sanctity too if you’re feeling fancy.
The Sicilians changes are great too.
What do you think if First Crusade spawns Sergeants at donjons instead of tcs?
Persians… well as others said melee armor on CA is underwhelming.
How about making Kamandaran a ranged version of Szlachta Privileges?
Say archer and CA lines -60% gold (adjust upgrade cost accordingly).
For the imp UT, maybe sth to make their cavalry better than generic.
None will ever want to have more melee armor on cav archers without bracer
You cannot allow the donjon to count as a building to go up….
Promise that will not end well.
What if the Donjon spawned two Serjeants upon completion.
Perhaps a strategy could exist where you go up around 18-20 population, Donjon your stone, send the first two Serjeants forward and start Donjon rushing the enemy.
Your push would get stronger each Donjon you build.
I feel like as it stands, the whole “can build a mega tower as a Militia clone” never sees play.
Serjeants only see play as a powerspike in late Castle Age to compensate for 5 TC greed.
Almost no one builds them in Feudal Age
I’m not really sure that the Persians new UT does anything useful.
HCA shouldn’t be tanking substantial amounts of melee damage, so adding melee armor isn’t super useful.
Hussars should be doing most of the tanking (particularly against melee units) in the HCA/hussar comp.
The main slavs problem (besides being boring) is that they are dead against mangudai, Orthodoxy monks was made to solve that problem.
I guess the best way is to give Slav monks +1 p armor per researched monastery tech, or give them blacksmith techs.
I would also give slavs 2 tile farms with 4/9 amount of their food amount and wood cost instead of their boring farming bonus.
I dont think these change the style how the civs tend to play out so not sure about this identity thing (imo thats a bad concept for aoe civs anyways which was never used before one streamer popularized it) but either way I think that’s decent balances changes to civs that most people consider in the weaker side.
Exception is melee armor for cav archers for persians.
Any ca UT will be completely useless here as long they lack bracer (or a functional equivalent).
Sounds great.
Agree with the rest the CA armour change isn’t appealing enough.
Something like that can go on a discounted CA with lower dmg, (Remember gurj factors on theirs)
The armour + monks might be too much on arena.
But then that map is just about the next OP start, so might be fine.
I like the Sicilian buffs.
Might not be enough but will help at least.
You’ll still need a rax to build a stable or range, so it’s still fairly limiting, but at least helps in some situations.
Possibly another arena cheese contender?
I like these, especially letting Donjons count as a feudal age building
I disagree with removing mahouts simply because it would ruin Persians on 10x civ mod
I like them all and if I saw these in a patch I’d say “hmmm interesting” and be excited to try them out.
That said Persians and Slavs aren’t weak I wouldn’t say, just boring, I think you do want to nerf Persians a bit to balance out your buffs (messing with elephants is always a dangerous thing balance wise).
They already have very good eco and are S tier on hybrid maps where you can easily get a massive boom.
Big fan of Slav changes.
Replacing Mahouts I agree with completely and I like the idea of integrating Persian cav archer play and referencing history, but extra melee armor just isn’t going to have much impact given the nature of the unit.
Maybe some other kind of effect that makes them as good or a little better than an average FU cav archer.
I think these are great.
Love these!
Free supplies is a really bad bonus in the current meta, so replacing that with free armor is great for slavs.
Sicilians are currently just a boring knight civ, it would be great if they could get their infantry/donjon identity back
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.
