Alright, time to Buff the Steppe Lancer again (also you did everything wrong and I'll explain why)

Age of Empires II: DE II - Discussion
1

I do not see the point to the steppe lancer having one pierce armor still.

In my eyes, having bad pierce armor was a caveat to balance it, that it would be (with it’s lower HP compounding) very counterable by Archers and Fortification. Now the damage is nerfed, the speed is nerfed, it’s not countering melee units in a really significant way anymore, why keep the terrible pierce armor?

This is coming from the assumption that you built it to not be a raiding unit, therefore lower pierce = more damage from fortifications and TC’s. Lower attack rate already makes it a very, very poor raiding unit since it’s quite fast. I don’t believe it needs help in that category.

Secondly, and this is a relevantly important caveat, if you don’t increase it’s pierce armor it’s going to be an unworkable frontline unit in large games or games with trade. You need a unit that is durable to sustained DPS to be an effective frontline, which is why having a civ that can field good Paladins is so important in team games. Steppe lancers, at this time, are the second worst cavalry for raiding, are not a rational option as a frontline unit, which puts them… where on the field?

I obviously thought they were too strong, but now I don’t know where I’d want to use them, and rationally, I wouldn’t. I want to use Cumans instant ramen LC and Tatars Silk armor LC over the Steppe lancer anywhere I want to raid, I want both of those over the lancer against archers, I want both of those over the steppe lancer against Monks, and I want both of those as a frontline for my Cav archers in insert opponent with inserted army

Here’s the problem. You hit the wrong points with the Lancer. The gold cost and collision box nerfs were fine. You shouldn’t have done more than that. There’s a way more important thing that you should have done, and that’s nerf the pierce armor. And I don’t mean take away one armor. I mean cut the base armor of the unit by one, and then take the legs out of the lategame cavalry by taking away Plate Barding.

“But now you’re making their Cavalry all terrible, we only want to nerf the Steppe Lancer” So you’d rather nerf all the things that make the new civs unique, like Cumans getting a massive eco lead in exchange for… We’re not sure at this point? No. And this is NOT going to make the cavalry line terrible. I just want to remind you that the Cumans, through all this, still have fully upgraded Hussars as a frontline for Keshiks that are created nigh instantly. This didn’t need to be touched at all? Are you sure? Removing the last armor upgrade on the cavalry would have toned that down a bit as well, and you wouldn’t have needed to adjust it at all, IMO.

We could have done away with the TC nerf that we gave the Cumans last patch, and mostly undid the Kipchak nerf. You just need to do the right thing and acknowledge that the Cumans, like every civ with a massive earlygame bonus, should have a window for victory. Right now there’s no wall where the window should be, and you’ve taken a sledgehammer to the statue in the lobby. No armor tech on the Cavalry? Win early enough to make it irrelevant or supplement your army to mitigate that weakness. They have all the tools to do so inside their tech tree. Siege ram is a thing.

And as for the Tatars, who also get the Steppe lancer, you can hit that option in other ways if it’s really necessary, but I’m not sure it would be with the increased gold cost and the reduced base pierce.

Right now the Steppe Lancer isn’t good in any role you want a unit to be good in. That means the changes didn’t work. Making a unit that is bad, just to get it out of the way, is not a good idea for the health of the meta. More options that are viable is always going to be a good thing. Steppe lancers are not. These changes will fix that.

TL:DR

Steppe Lancer [Standard & Elite]: Pierce Armor decreased by one (from 1 > 0)
Steppe Lancer [Standard & Elite]: Rate of Fire readjusted (from 2.3 > 1.9)
Steppe Lancer Damage increased (from 8 > 9)
Elite Steppe Lancer Damage increased (from 10 > 12)
Cumans lose Plate Barding armor
Cumans TC build time decreased (from 270 > 225)
Elite Kipchaks now fire increased arrows (from 3 > 4)

9 Likes
2

Nice
Finally a knowledgeable person comes and tells everyone how the game is supposed to work.
I’m glad that you decided to give us your opinion in such a humble way. Let’s hope all of us benefit from your thoughts in the years to come.

12 Likes
3

Yesterday I used the Cumans for the first time, and the truth is, I prefer to use the Hussar instead of the Steppe Lancers, spend less resources.

2 Likes
4

i disagree, steppe lancers are still very useful if you’re fighting vs groups of archers. The trick is simply to use the right patrol and mass enough.

Also something else to your suggestions and to everyone else who makes suggestions here about unit balance etc., there is one thing you guys should know: The forum here has very, very little impact (if there is even any) on the balance of the game. The balance of the game isn’t actually discussed or decided here. The place where it’s actually done is the balance discord, where only top players (Hera, Viper, Daut, TheMax, Rubenstock, Mbl etc.), a few top streamers (Nili, T90 and for whatever reason Ornlu) and the guys behind WK (Trirem) have access. There the decisions about what has to be done or should be done are pretty much made.
So writing essays about how balance should be is maybe a bad time investment, since it has very, very little influence (if even some).

2 Likes
5

Well actually FE does monitor the forums, whether is here, reddit or AoEZone. I’m not a dev, but I also do that, and I will bring up issues to the balance team if I see a good post pointing it out anywhere.
So definitely go make some long posts on balance suggestions and alike, if it’s good it won’t be for nothing.

2 Likes
6

That’s 100% BS. A lot of these guys made videos about steppe lancers saying “they are completely useless now! steppe lancers have been destroyed”
If what you said was true, then they destroyed the unit on purpose and made all that circus pretending they didn’t know about it and are terrible at dealing with balance changes.
They even talk in streams and videos about how bad a civ is and how it needs some buffs, others some nerfs and all that jazz and can’t change anything? That’s total bs dude

7

First of all, no high level player has said that. There hasn’t been nearly enough time to get a good enough idea of how strong they are, and secondly anyone that said they are useless is either hyperbolating or not experienced enough.

And second what Tanks said is completely true. Most high level players and casters are balance consultants for Forgotten Empires and have a hand in crafting the balance.

5 Likes
8

Most of what you said was making sense till I saw the “lose Plate Barding armor”. Are you kidding? A cavalry civilization with a low rate of attack, low-hp cavalry archer unique unit and no plate barding armor or bracer. What will players make with this civilization? It will end up being worse than Indians.
Just increase the rate of fire of Kipchaks back to 1.9 seconds per hit and rate of fire of steppe lancers back to 2.3 or gold cost to 35 gold. That should be fine. With the suggestions you’ve mentioned Cumans would be one of the worst civilizations and Steppe Lancer would be the worst gold unit in the game.

2 Likes
9

Did you even watch their videos before saying that?

2 Likes
10

Both said the nerfs were heavy (which is true) and that they’re not sure if they’re still useful after those nerfs (which is reasonable, this many changes at once could be too much). Neither said that they are useless now or that they’ve been destroyed.

9 Likes
11

You can change the words all you like. The point still stands and most of them agree the unit was overnerfed.
Viper said “Steppe lancers are dead and out. They’ve been nerfed a loooooooooot. They’re super nerfed. They’re SUPER nerfed”
If you really think out of the blue that steppe lancers are still playable you haven’t even tested them again.
Go on editor and just make a 30 hussar vs 30 steppe lancers and see how many hussars are left 11

1 Like
12

Played with the cumans 2x times after the nerf. The truth is: they still a good civ.

My kipchaks destroyed some Conqs, and my Steppe Lancers destroyed some archers.

Let the things be the way they are.

13

I think Steppe Lancers need a bit re-nerfing too. They are a bit weaker than they are supposed to be.
Maybe make them stack like before and give them a bit attack speed.

14

I think you are confused.

The patch slowed the ROF (meaning less attacks per second) and reduced the damage. I am advocating for re-adjusting the damage but otherwise bringing it all back.

Cumans have fully upgraded hussars made nigh instantly. If we don’t take something away from the cavalry, at large, that will still be an issue. That helps to balance the Steppe lancer in a civ that generally has an amazing economy, better than any other civ.

The changes I am suggesting will make the Steppe lancer very nearly as good against melee units as it was pre-patch, the collision changes will make them slightly less ridiculous, and the increased gold cost will make amassing them more difficult and less efficient, but otherwise pretty much the same unit. The difference here is I want them to be far more vulnerable to archer fire, meaning a player who puts out any sort of archer unit is going to be able to dissuade engagements due to the massive damage they incur from archer fire coupled with their already low HP.

Put it this way. Cavalry tree is generally used to counter archers and siege. Camels are specifically anti-cavalry, and lose a lot of the anti-archer value (though they still have the speed). I want Steppe Lancer to be anti-infantry, and slightly anti-cavalry, but be the most vulnerable cavalry to archers. Flip the triangle. I think that’s a better concept (and probably what the designers wanted it to be in a way) just they got the numbers wrong.

15

I think the attack should be as good as a knight line. Maybe 9 for regular steppe lancer and 11 for Elite one. also, buff the rate of fire a littel (maybe 2.1). I want them to be good, not as broken as they were, but not useless. I like how you put it. It’s good to have a good anty mele cav, but super weak against arrows.

1 Like
16

I’m not confused. I understand that you’re suggesting that the attack and rate of attack of Elite Steppe Lancers be restored to pre-patch and instead remove plate barding armor. That’s a huge nerf for the civ as it affects all stable units. If plate barding armor were to be removed there’s no solid unit for Cumans in late imperial age in an event their castles are destroyed or when they’re against an army that does well against Kipchaks.
And regarding the hussars thing, its good if they nerf that bonus to +40 or 50%. Franks get something like that too. Many old civs have crazy strong units or bonuses Conquistadors, Mangudai, Chu ko nus, Drill, Furor celtica etc.
Whats the point in introducing new civs if they’re nerfed so much that no one would pick any of them in free pick games. This is what they did to Burmese, Indians and now pro players barely ever choose it even if they had to pick like a pool of 11 civs or more. If they remove plate barding armor that’s what will happen to Cumans too. I feel this civ shouldn’t be nerfed anymore except for Steppe lancers if necessary. And definitely Kipchaks’ rate of fire should be restored. Maybe their cost or creation time should be increased instead.

17

No, and this is why your input isn’t useful.

You are practically saying “nerf all the unique things about the civ and make it generic” when you can go a different route and make it work while maximizing the interesting aspects of the civ. What exactly about “they get access to a Feudal TC and Siege Workshop” screams lategame to you? A rational person might very well ask why they need to be a good late Imp civ with the massive advantages they get.

Further, taking away plate barding armor won’t suddenly make their lategame bad. After you’ve massed enough kipchaks, it’s similar to how the Magyars or Huns will build their economy, very one-dimensionally on food since your main turnover is on the frontline. When your hussars travel faster and create like Shotels, you don’t need to worry about replacing your Kipchaks against armies that aren’t just full of superior archer options. For that, I must remind you that the Cumans get both siege ram AND siege onager. They are not hurting for lategame options without Plate Barding, and that’s an absurd proposition. It’d make them tangibly beatable in the lategame, because as of the moment their lategame is ridiculous. You literally need four times as many buildings for production as they do to keep up with their production, and staying 200 pop as Cumans is laughably easy whereas staying 200 pop against them is a tremendous task, before even considering the option of using their already faster than normal cavalry to raid you.

They need Plate barding armor taken away. They needed it in beta, where I recommended the exact same thing. To be fair, they took me up on the suggestion to limit the TC’s to one. It’s my belief that taking away Plate barding armor and adjusting the base pierce of the Lancer can account for all the changes they’ve made to bring the Cumans into line without ruining the most interesting bits of the civ.

I’ll leave it at that. Either way, not only does your post lack a reasonable assertion, but it fails to properly evaluates the strength of the civ both before, and after, the patch. I’d chalk that up to a lack of skill, though I could also see that someone who plays at a decent level would simply be woefully uninformed or inexperienced with the civ due to avoiding it because of how broken it was. Either way, it’s clear you simply don’t know what you’re talking about. I don’t know how to say that in a way that conveys your lack of a reasonable understanding on the subject without being a jerk, so the way of the jerk it is.

1 Like
18

The feudal age TC is basically a trade off between losing map control and putting yourself at a risk of getting sieged vs building a bigger economy if it works. Its like an early version of mini boom with other civs in Castle age.
I’m just comparing Cumans to other cavalry civs like Magyars, Franks which also get good bonuses but don’t lose plate barding armor. If hussars getting created like shotels is the most OP, then why do you not recommend nerfing that and instead recommend nerfing all cavalry. There’s literally no cavalry civ that lacks plate barding armor.
I like the civ the way it is now and felt you’re suggested changes of removing an important upgrade is stupid and goes against the norm of assigning it as a cavalry civilization. I know the game and I know what I’m talking about. I used to play regularly on voobly and have about 1000 rated games. I’m not a pro player but everyone is entitled to have an opinion. The way you see a civ to be might not be the same for many others. Don’t be a moron and personally criticize someone who proposes a different opinion than yours.

1 Like
19

The feudal age TC is only one of the two feudal age options they have access to that can make a massive difference. Having rams in feudal, a unit that takes 175 arrows to kill, makes their feudal pressure insane. They can go M@A towers just like everyone else. Unlike everyone else, they can drop a Siege Workshop on the front, in feudal, and have a unit that resists archer fire. They don’t need to do that. They have, at any point, the option to just not drop the Siege workshop and instead invest that wood into their extra TC. The cumans are the only civ in the game that can realistically deal lethal damage in the feudal age. They also have the best potential feudal boom in the game.

Assuming the cumans give away map control is a very poor assumption. They don’t need to ignore the map to build a second TC if they want to. Cumans can play the map better than most civs given how they can TC to secure resources in the early ages and raid-proof their economy. That doesn’t somehow stop them from being able to aggress and apply pressure if that potential is missing (hills, bad resource locations, sparse woodlines, etc) or if the opponent has a relatively poor map.

I’ve already made a clear reason why you can’t boom against the Cumans to counter their early eco advantage, and if it wasn’t clear, refresh on paragraph 1 of my summary. Beating the Cumans requires good scouting of their map to get a read on their plan and to properly address it. They aren’t just the extra TC. They are certainly a nuisance if they get that going, and given random map variability it’s an option that will eventually be exercised for them, but that is far from their only absurd option.

And did you seriously just claim the Mongols, one of the oldest and well-known civs in the game, has Plate Barding armor? Or are you claiming that Mongols are not a cavalry civ. Either way, weird hill to die on there. Mongols are the perfect example of a civ that manages without Plate barding and the mongols would kill for the things Cumans get for free.

20

HMm intresting how about noh ?

1 Like