Balance suggestion for the Elite Conquistador

Hi, everyone. I was thinking the Elite Conquistador upgrade provides very little value to the non-elite Conquistador. For 1200 food and 600 gold, all you get is +2 attack and +15 HP. It also adds more bonus damage against rams… but this isn’t huge. 6 range is kind of weak in the Imperial age when most units… even generic Castle age units outrage it. I was wondering if it would be better if the Elite Conquistador can get +1 range.

7 range is still not too much for an Imperial age unit. I understand that it can outrange towncenters but so do Cavalry archers and Mangudai… that +1 range would be very significant in Castle age, though. Right now, there seems to be almost no reason to make Conquistadors over Hand Cannoneers in the Imperial age apart from the mobility.

For the Turks, Janissaries get +5 attack, a little more HP (I think it’s 6) and +1 range instead of +10 bonus damage vs infantry.

For the Portuguese, they get +1 range, +3 attack and some spread damage and +2 pierce armor which makes them pretty decent vs archers, skirmishers, etc.

All the Spanish get is +1 attack, +15 HP but they also take anti-cavalry and anti-archer/anti-cavalry archer bonus damage.

The Conquistador costs 60 food, 70 gold while the Janissary costs 60 food, 55 gold. So, they cost more. I forgot the cost of the Organ Guns.
What do you guys think? Developers, what do you think?


Conqs have always been kind of lackluster in Imp, but it was because they are super good in castle, tho now with the DE nerf it can be debatable and could motivate some more power in imp. However Spanish have paladins + perfect trash so I wouldn’t be too worried about their late-game.


I agree they’re super good in Castle age. I’m just saying I don’t see a reason to spend 1200 food and 600 gold for the upgrade. In comparison, the Elite Janissary upgrade costs 850 good, 750 gold. I would rather spend those resources in the Knight line and Hand Cannons (once Chemistry is researched).

This is not an issue with the civilization, it’s an issue with its unique unit in the Imperial age.

Overall, the Spanish do have a strong late game with perfect trash, FU Paladins, FU Champions, FU Warships (with the cannon galleon bonus), FU Monks with the Inquisition tech, Supremacy tech, FU defenses minus heated shot (which is a situational tech), Siege rams, useable Onagers, Faster firing Hand cannoneers and Bombard cannons (sans Siege Engineers), faster building bombard towers, etc.

FU -> Fully upgraded.

1 Like

The elite upgrade gives little precisely because the castle age unit is so strong. It’s perfectly reasonable design.

If you think the upgrade is too expensive for what it gives, then the fix is to maybe make the upgrade cheaper, not to powercreep the strongest castle age UU in what is already one of the most versatile post imp civs.


Organ guns and Janissaries also do not gain additional range when upgraded to Elite. Conquistadors should have 1 less range than their unmounted counterparts, and since hand cannoneers have 7 range, I think it makes sense that non-Elite and Elite Conquistadors have 6 range.

Elite Conquistadors also gain a +2 atk bonus vs buildings, which is kinda useful. They also get a tiny increase to their accuracy.

I’m leaning towards lowering the cost of the Elite upgrade. We can’t lower the gold cost of Conquistadors because they would make them way too good in the castle age. I think their Elite form is okay, but making them more accessible would give them a little more oomph.

I would even consider giving them more stats with the elite upgrade (1 or 2 more dmg for example). Gunpowder units miss and overkill so often that a few dmg points don’t make much of a difference. But I would still always keep their 6 range.


True that Janissaries and Organ Guns don’t get extra range when they get their Imperial upgrade. Ok, that’s an interesting point you made there.

I thought the non-elite version has the +2 attack bonus vs buildings. Didn’t know it was only for the Elite version. That increase in accuracy is from 65% to 70%, right?

I was never in favour of lowering the gold cost.

Yeah… giving them more attack makes sense. I was initially thinking of either +1 range OR +1 attack and +10 HP.

yeah, I guess we should take into consideration the entire civilization for balance when talking about the unique unit. Lowering the cost of the upgrade is a good idea too.

seems that’s the common characteristics of Canonneers. They are very strong in castle age, then gradually fade and become weaker than archers in imperial war (except Turks getting extra hp). It makes players to choose b/w short term and long term.

Mate. There are ONLY two Hand Canooneer units other than the Organ Gun. One of them gets a decent buff late Imperial. Choosing between short term and long term isn’t there for the Turks since they lack Arbalesters anyway.

The Janissary is decent in Castle age but actually gets better the longer the game lasts… and is objectively the better unit in late Imperial for the Turks.

The Conquistador is very strong in the Castle Age but gets worse the longer the game lasts. If you compare them with Hand Cannonners, they are the worse unit and do almost everything better.

In Castle age, Conquistador > Janissary.
In Late Imperial, Janissary > Conquistador.

1 Like

And yet Spanish are an actually decent civ and turks are not

Honestly the Spanish have fallen pretty hard since the conquistador nerf. They aren’t picked much anymore in tournaments and they haven’t done that well in ranked games. I understand that before DE, the conquistador was like a cobra car but it may have been too harsh because now they get outperformed by the majority of civs.


E. Conq is still pretty good in imp. Ofc they are not as powerful as they are in castle age. But 18 atk with RoF 2.9 still do a good dps.

I think they receive nerf since de is to nerf conq in castle age. But in imp, I agree E. Conq does not need a nerf. A possible way to solve this is to add cavalry archer class armor (+5) to E. Conq. This can block anti-CA bonus dmg.

This is also what I was thinking about. But I think +5 is quite a lot giving the fact that the most regular unit dealing anti-CA bonus dmg is the Elite Skirm that only deals +2 bonus dmg anyway. +5 would make Conqs like immune to Camel Archers.

So I’d argue that +1 anti-CA armor for Castle Age Conqs and +2 for Elite-Conqs would be fine.

1 Like

I just compare E. Conq in de to hd. They did not receive any anti-CA bonus dmg in hd, and hence not from Camel archer either. Therefore, I threw up idea like that, letting them immune to anti-CA bonus dmg.

Yes, that’s true. But they used to be considered as op or at least as very very strong in Castle Age. So I think we should find a solution to make them better than they are now in DE, but worse than they were in HD.

1 Like

Overall, Yes. If you aren’t talking about black forest or michi, the Spanish have the edge.




Sounds like a good idea.

1 Like

so turks are relegated to team games on a map played less then 6% of the time.


I guess you can say that… relegated to team games especially on maps that are played less.

point being is thats not good balance. every civ should be able to perform decently on the standard map. which for aoe2 is arabia. they don’t all have to be all stars, but they should at least hold there own.


Now the question remains: What do you think?

I personally think the price should be halved, for sure. It gives practically nothing.

1 Like