don’t pretend like replacing it with wood is enough to offset a 260 stone discount. On a 4v4 on Black Forrest the price of Stone can go up to like 300 and even further if the game goes on long enough. And Slav late game is already strong enough as is with the farm bonus, Paladin, Boyars, Druzhina, and cheap siege.
1 Like
On that map and setting maybe
On other maps (and for all 1v1s), this UT is definetly not useful, games simply dont go that long
3 Likes
I think we should give it some time before complaining
We should not balance the game around a Black forest 4v4 of all things
Franks specifically have a fairly fast eco, with a very smooth knight rush with a rapid transition into paladins, they also have access to gunpowder and a UU that mainly only counters trash and rams very well. Outside of that they’re terrible, their eco advantage arguably runs out by mid castle age, they have terrible light cav so their raiding is abysmal, they will lose any infantry Vs infantry civ battle unless they use HC
Slavs have a very slow eco that ramps up into the late game, no additional advantage whatsoever for knights, excellent siege BUT NO BBC (this is huge it completely changes how they have to deal with opposing trebs and siege of all things) they have FU hussars so have amazing late game raiding, and ultimately can fight most infantry civs head on with their own or rely on scorps. You will spam castles for an expensive UU that is still eaten by halbs. It’s a great UU but by no means makes them like Franks purely because it comes in so late. And that UT is expensive enough that you cannot just dump castles like Franks can out the gate.
As far as civs being too similar, I really don’t think they tick the box.
Either way they’re more interesting to face than something like Sicilians or Britons that literally just spam one unit
Their current lower pick rate is more than likely due to the player base being so adverse to using siege
13 Likes
The similarity might be intentional, because as of right now every civ that lacks bracer has a bonus or unique tech that is related to defense in some way or another, except the Slavs, so they might have wanted to make it a rule with no exception.
3 Likes
we should not balance anything around a single map or gamemode but if a civilization is blatantly Op under those settings that is a problem for people who enjoy those setting. “games simply dont go that long” So it okay for something to be OP if most games don’t last long enough for it to become a factor. And stop pretending its not broken even with just 2 Castle you have save 520S for the price of 920W 200G. if you were to sell the same to use the same resource at the market (assuming starting price which being very generous) Sell the same amount you would have 20W 58G, and 400S. The Seriously why does no one understand how important stone is in the late game Slav are already a decent civ. and giving them this a 40% stone discount is a ridiculous decision and its baffling why people are defending it
Frank bonus is for free. For Slavs, you have to collect 650 stone, get your first castle and then spend another 600 resources for the tech. So I guess it should be fine.
All good but they cost 80 gold and will still die to halbs. Slavs have a very mediocre pick rate on both Tg and 1v1, open and closed at all levels. So its good that they are getting a buff.
4 Likes
And how do you know that?
1 Like
How about a unique tech cause trade carts to generate Stone I don’t need to test it in order to know that it is OP. Stone is a very finite resource there two ways to acquire it you can mine it or buy it. buying it cause the fair market rate to go up by 3 but do to trade fees this is increased to 3.9 or 3.45 with guilds making the market an increasingly more expensive option to acquire stone especially in 1v1’s. There is a third option available to the Portuguese which grants .3 Stone per second but also cost 250S and 20 pop. All of these design decisions lead to stone being increasingly expensive resource. This is a good thing because otherwise players could spam towers and castles endlessly. Wood is a very cheap resource in the late game it is that is sold at bottomed out market prices sometime even in team games. Stone is even more expensive than gold therefore the ability to save stone at the cost of wood is very strong. and an upfront cost of 400W and 200G is not enough to balance it. This may sound condescending, and it is. Anyone with a basic understanding of the game mechanics should understand that a 40% stone discount is really good
Slav are not bad just boring
1 Like
But it’s a discount that doesn’t make too much sense to get until a bit later in the game, and the castles and towers you’re buying with it are essentially unupgraded, because the Slavs don’t get any of the good improvements. So they’re essentially not worth as much as some other civs’ castles.
Let’s just see how it plays out.
1 Like
yes and make it all wood no stone
Now that’s where we go into OP territory. 
Well you’re busy screaming and kicking against a change that is supposed to help with that, so no wonders people disagree with you.
1 Like
Making limiting each tile to 350S was a deliberate choose by the developer. Feitoria used to cost wood instead of stone and also to generate stone 50% faster this was deliberately changed to because allowing one civ to generate endless supply of Stone even at a slow rate was too powerful. If players had more access to stone, they could spam castle or towers leading to stalemates.
These are all good points, but I don’t think the new Slav UU is OP, not even on Black Forest. Castles that cost less stone are nice, but some civs have bonuses that are even better for Black Forest. Franks are nowhere near a top pick on Black Forest despite also having access to Castles that cost less stone.
On Arabia, the UU is even worse. Like others have mentioned, you must have already built a Castle and need to invest in the tech before getting the effect, and before researching the UU is cost effective, you have likely already built multiple Castles.
6 Likes
Well Boyars are the reason Slavs aren’t just a siege+infantry civ, and cheaper castles conveniently help with that. So the “change the civ playstyle” part kinda checks out. Slavs also lack architecture so they would still be worse than Franks and Byzantine at “creating stalemates”
8 Likes
You’re vastly overrating how strong the new UT compares to what Franks currently get as:
- Due to being a UT Slavs are forced to create their first Castle full-priced, this results in the UT only saving significantly more Stone than Franks after the second Castle if we take in account only Stone. If we also take in account the 290W you have to pay for each Castle + the 400w/200g cost of the UT it only becomes more cost-effective after the third-fourth Castle depending on the Market.
- Franks have access to Architecture and Slavs don’t, outside of that their defensive structure tech tree is more or less identical
- Franks gain access to a UU with very potent and unique utility for their Civ that serves to mitigate the weaknesses of their main power unit the Knight, Slavs only get access to a slightly better version of the former.
- Slav Towers lack many critical upgrades such as Keeps and the previously mentioned Architecture, the theoretical utility of those towers being discounted is very low and definitely not enough to surpass Franks
3 Likes
Cope and seethe, it’s only good for FFA, as pocket Slavs in closed map TGs opens on halb SO usually anyway.
It’s so far from being OP I would have liked it to be 50% and not affect towers or something.
1 Like
Slavs are literally a lower mid-tier civ, even after cheaper Castles discount I’m VERY sure they won’t be Burgundians- or Chinese-tier, particularly given how the Castles discount is locked behind a tech (unlike Franks one).
2 Likes
I think, that the change is good. Close to 100% of the players agreed, that orthodoxy needed a rework or at least a buff. Since Boyar is Slavs Paladin replacement and still a hardly underused unit, the idea has some taste. As the others pointed out, the simple fact, that first castle will always be a full price investment, sod balance will most likely not suffer.
The only issue I see is the fact, that Slavs are already a very strong late game. Ofc a UT can always just support late game, but Slavs will need a slight early game bonus in addition to get a higher pickrate and some use i big tournaments.
2 Likes