Balance suggestions (Teutons, Indians, Turks, Spanish, Incas, Saracens)

As the title says, here are some suggestions. English is not my first language so please bear with me if I make any grammar or puctuation mistakes.
First I’ll start with my 2 favorite civs: teutons and indians.

This civ was conceived as a defensive powerhouse, doing a pretty good job fulfilling its role. Sadly, after The Forgotten expansion came out, it was left behind. The main reason being that Teutons were too slow. And I’m not referring to their movement speed. Their offensive potential and civ growth were too slow compared to new civs which had fast-paced offensive playstyle (Magyars, Indians, Ethiopians, Berbers, Burmese, Cumans, etc). Then aoe2 DE came out, and Teutons received some new improvements to make them more offensive and fast-paced in castle age. However those changes, while they make their knight rush more effective, don’t address real teuton problems: 1. being too rigid. 2. getting their hp chipped away due to their slow movement speed. 3. being gold-hungry starting from castle age/early imperial age. In other words, this seems lazy design.
In particular, I’m talking about their +2 meele armor (total) bonus for barracks and stable units. It’s true it reinforces their identity as an “armored” civ, but it still doesn’t solve their problems. It’s redundant and just makes them better where they already are. The role of heavy meele infantry is already fulfilled by their teutonic knights. It’s been almost a year since that new bonus was introduced and, clearly, knights benefit the most from it. Now, I like that +1 extra meele armor for knights in castle age. I admit it’s a huge help and boosts the Teutons’ offensive capabilities. But I’m against the second +1 they get in the imperial age. They are already tanky. Why not focus on their pierce armor. Their paladins don’t have husbandry and their slowness makes them lose significant hp before they can close in and fight archers. Cavalry is supposed to kill archers to protect infantry, but teuton paladins are more vulnerable to (post)imperial ranged units than other cavalry. They don’t have light cavalry, and their slow scout cavalry can’t even dream of surviving imperial age archers. The answer is skirmishers without thumb ring and bracers + siege onagers, scorpions or bombard cannons. Then again, they need a lot of gold. I propose adding gold return for destroyed siege units as a passive form of gold sustain. It also synergizes well with the ironclad tech.

  • Leave their tech tree as it is.

Civ bonus

  • Barracks and Stable units receive +1 meele armor in the castle and imperial age (+2 total).
    Replaced by: Stable units receive +1 meele armor in the castle age and +1 pierce armor in the imperial age. (+1/+1 total)
  • Murder Holes and Herbal Medicine are free.
    Replaced by: Siege workshop units return 20% gold when they are destroyed.

Historical background: During the middle ages, siege became the primary means of warfare. The vast majority of battles were fought in defense of or the attempt to take fortifications. One example is the siege of Kaunas. The Teutonic Order built ramparts and canals to cut off the Lithuanian Kaunas castle from the mainland. They also built trebuchets and siege towers to overrun the fortification. The defenders managed to push away the siege engines and even destroyed some of them. The Order reacted quickly and rebuilt more engines using the remains; the knights kept pounding the outer walls until they finally collapsed. But Vaidotas would rapidly repair the damage too. The siege lasted a whole month until the Teutonic Order eventually overcame the Lithuanians.

They are the second victim of lazy and mediocre design. The problem here is that there wasn’t just one “Indian” civilization in medieval times. In the region, there were different cultures and several political groups. However, all of them had 3 things in common when it came to warfare: 1. fast infantry. 2. elephants. 3. archers. To be blunt, if you are going to set them up as an umbrella civilization, at least make it so the concept revolves around the things they have in common. Not just searching “medieval India”, and half-assing everything. I think Indians need a rework, but oh well. In this thread, I’m going to focus on the elephant archer.
Traditionally, there are 3 classic balance approaches: 1. Overpowering one aspect, then weakening gradually until it’s balanced. 2. Underpowering one aspect, then strengthening gradually until it’s balanced. 3. Doing both at the same time but on different aspects.
As an example for the third approach, let’s take a look at tyranitar from the pokemon franchise. In the games, this pokemon is considered exceptionally strong despite being a normal pokemon (a pseudo-legendary, as they call it). On paper, it seems above the rest: it has superior hp, superior attack, superior defenses, mediocre speed, superior and versatile move pool (capable of using water, fire, ice, electric, steel, dark, rock, ground, ghost and dragon elements) plus a total of 600 (700 mega) stat points. Looks invincible, right? Well, no. Tyranitar can be 1 hit KOed by hitmonlee who only has 455 stat points. The thing is tyranitar is rock and dark type, which translates to 6 weaknesses and 1 double-weakness. Also, 4 of them are some of the most common types, so tyranitar can be countered in almost every duel. The elephant archer is in a similar situation. It has 5 armor classes, which means it has about 8 weaknesses. But the only good thing about it is its hp pool. Elephant archers don’t have the versatility tyranitar has. Because of this, some people consider them just damage-absorbing “walking towers”. Something they are not due to their low meele armor. Now, this leads us to a different question: What is the role of elephant archers? Their current “correct” role is very situational; only when Indians are facing specialized infantry civs like Goths, Japanese or Aztecs, and need hand cannoneers. In that case, elephant archers protect these arquebusiers. Basically, elephant archers are relegated to be the support of situational units. Other than that, they don’t have a real role. They don’t offer something more viable, that’s why elephant archers are underused. Besides, the Indian core is imperial camels followed by cavalry archers for mobility, and skirmishers as generic support. The elephant archer simply can’t keep up with their speed, and its cost ruins the unit production balance.

Unit production 1
Food, gold: imperial camels.
Wood, gold: cavalry archers.
Food, wood: skirmishers

Unit production 2
Food, gold: champions, imp camels
Food, gold: hand cannoneers, elephant archers
Food, wood: halberdier/hussars

Now, following the tyranitar example, the solution I propose is making elephant archers more viable in diverse scenarios by making them even weaker than they already are, but with versatility. Let’s start by giving them a role: in history, ancient Indians used elephants as a multi-purpose pushing force. Now they can do that but at the same time, they can be countered easily.

  • Leave their tech tree as it is.

Elephant archer
Cost: 120 wood and 70 gold.
HP: 250/300 (elite)
Attack bonuses: ADDITIONAL +1 vs infantry. +3 vs unique units. +2 vs ships.
Pierce armor: 2.
Speed: 0.96.

Historical background: “An army without elephants is as despicable as a forest without a lion, a kingdom without a king, or as valor unaided by weapons”. Elephants were used in the ancient Indian army, irrespective of regions, dynasties, or points in time; their importance was never denied and continued well into the medieval period as well. The ready availability in the subcontinent of the Indian elephant, one of the three recognized subspecies of the Asian elephant and native to mainland Asia, led to its gradual taming and use in both peace and war. Capable of fulfilling a variety of military functions, the most important of which was the psychological impact it could cause.

The Turks’ overall power is fine. Their concept and design is fine. They are an imperial civ and their end-game is fine. Their only economic bonus is “gold miners work 20% faster”, which isn’t useful before the castle or imperial age. But ok. Their real problem is that their growth is not smooth at all. And I’m not talking about their offensive power. They get light cavalry upgrades for free, which is supposed to serve as a boost to their light cavalry rush and help them buy enough time to get to the imperial age. Their problem is their defensive capabilities from dark age until middle-late castle age. While they can be played like any other civ until feudal age, in castle age they become stagnant when it comes to answering an attack due to their lack of pikemen and elite skirmishers upgrades. This also plays a part in their decline in post-imperial, when gold is exhausted. So, in one hand, this imperial civ has slow growth and is prone to get stuck in the castle age. On the other hand, even after reaching the post-imperial age, a deadlock will be a defeat. Just a matter of time. Hussars with +1 pierce armor certainly help, but it’s not enough in trash wars.
It’s clear Turks can’t receive pikemen and elite skirms for balance reasons. So instead of just +1 PA only for the light cavalry line, I propose increasing spearmen, skirmishers, and light cavalry HP by 10 points. This would increase their survivability against meele and ranged attacks slightly in the castle age, while keeping the usual spearmen and skirmishers low stats and bonuses compared to their upgraded versions. At the same time, they’ll be more useful during post-imperial. Generic spearmen/skirmishers < Turkish spearmen/skirmishers < pikemen/elite skirmishers.

  • Leave their tech tree as it is.

Civ bonus

  • Scout Cavalry line gain +1 pierce armor.
    Replaced by: Scout Cavalry line, spearmen and skirmishers gain +10 hit points in the castle age.

Historical background: Orhan Gazi (Orhan I) organized a standing army paid by salary rather than looting of fiefs. The infantry was called yayas and the cavalry was known as musellems. The force was made up of foreign mercenaries for the most part, and only a few Turks were content to accept salaries in place of timars. Foreign mercenaries also received free clothes and weapons from their Ottoman commanders; as a result, this irregular army had better equipment than others in the region.

The spanish are fine. Just like the turks, they are fine as they are now. The only thing that needs a little fix is their conquistadors.

  • Leave their tech tree as it is.

Civ bonus

  • New: Human gunpowder units (conquistadors and hand cannoneers) gain +5% accuracy in the castle and imperial age (+10% total).

Historical background: The tercios (1534-1704) were a famous military elite of the Spanish empire. Over one and a half centuries, they were known as the finest European infantry force and were the first to effectively mix pikes and arquebuses. The tercios were professional soldiers and volunteers in permanent ranks. They were regular units always at arms, even under no imminent threat. It was said the tercios were so proficient at the usage of their arquebuses, that they could reload and fire accurately twice before the smoke of the first shot disappeared.

Curious how most of the worst designs are from The Forgotten expansion. The Incas are the third victims of mediocre design. They desperately need a full rework; even more now that their villagers no longer get blacksmith upgrades in the feudal age, and the devs are so hellbent on getting rid of walling and tower rushing. As a sign, towers were nerfed when DE came out. But hey, all the current Inca civ bonuses are aimed for tower rushing:

-start with a free llama: 6 villagers eating a llama results in 88 food = 1 extra villager can be sent forward in feudal age for tower rushing.
-villagers benefit from infantry blacksmith upgrades: Sturdy villagers to attack and defend while building towers. Or just extra defense in case they get rushed.
-houses support 10 population: Everytime you save 25 wood and construction time. Just enough wood to sustain towers, and villagers can spend some more seconds on something else.
-Buildings are 15% stone cheaper: Towers.

Basically, with the last nerf, Incas only have 2 bonuses until castle age: the llama and 10 pop houses.
This begs the question of what is this civilization’s role in-game. I imagine someone in the dev team thought “Incas = Macchu picchu, stone… so tower rushing” during the concept design. And now due to balance reasons and easy gameplay, they want to get rid of tower rushing. Which is the same as getting rid of Incas. Sure, they can still work and act as a generic civ, without bonuses. But that also means they have no identity.
Another problem the incas have is that they lack gold sustain. New world civs are some of the most gold-hungry in-game; on top of that, they are also gold dependant. Aztecs can handle this thanks to their extra carry capacity (gold miners) and +33% gold from relics. Mayans can deal with it using their 2 bonuses: resources last +15% (gold mines) and foot archers discount. However, Incas have no way to sustain their gold other than having more gold miners and creating more trade units in team games. Both options take time and population space. Incas might even be more gold hungry than Aztecs and Mayans because most of the units in the Incan core army require gold (siege, eagles, slingers, archers, champions, and kamayuk). Because of these factors, tower rushing was fundamental as a mean of solving future problems of gold shortagefor the Incas. Mainly by pressuring the enemies, causing damage to buy enough time to surpass their development, and ending the match as fast as possible. Something that definitely can be done since Incas have a solid tech tree and are also known as a jack of all trades, master of none.
What we can do is keep their tech tree and turn it into their new identity: versatility. If Aztecs focus on infantry and Mayans focus on archers, then incas will NOT focus on defense. They will focus on versatility to make the best out of their unique units and unique techs. In other words, incas will be a countering civ with their strength escalating slowly in different stages of the game. I propose:

  • Leave their tech tree as it is.
  • New unit: inca llama (50 food)

Civ bonus

  • Incas start with a free llama.
    Replaced by: Incas start with 1 inca llama.

-Gameplay: Results in 44 food.
-Historical background: Incas raised llamas as livestock.

  • Villagers benefit from Blacksmith infantry upgrades.
    Replaced by: All resources are gathered 10% faster. Except for farms, fish traps and fishing (villagers).

-Gameplay: Incas need a general economic bonus to help them set up their economy early and take a fast-paced playstyle like Aztecs and Mayans. This economic bonus is a weakened counterpart of the Aztecs’ extra +3 carry capacity to all resources, or the Mayans’ all resources last +15% longer. It’s also a very weak version of specialized economic bonuses others civs have (+20%). It’s technically a unique bonus since no other civ has a faster gathering rate to many resources like this, despite being at a low rate. Furthermore, farms, fish traps and fast fishermen were excluded for balance reasons and to avoid repetition (Slavs and Indians).
-Historical background: The Incas excelled at farming, but they also placed great emphasis on storing agricultural products, constructing thousands of storage silos (qullqa or qollqas) in every major center of their empire and along their extensive road system. Food could be stored for up to two years in these granaries before spoiling due to the ventilation and drainage. Dried meat (jerky), freeze-dried potatoes (chuño), maize, and quinoa were among the crops stored in large quantities for the provisioning of the Inca army and officialdom and as a hedge against poor crop years. Careful records were kept of the products and quantities stored on the knotted cords, called quipu, which the Incas used instead of a written language. On the desert coast extensive irrigation works were necessary for agriculture. Cotton was a major crop near the coast and coca was a major crop in the humid lowlands of the Amazon basin. The population on the coast was more specialized than the highland population with communities of farmers, fishermen, potters, weavers and others. Instead of self-sufficiency trade was extensive among the various producers. Unlike the highlands, the lowlanders utilized shells and gold as a form of money. However, in the coastal communities, the same emphasis on collective management and reciprocity prevailed as in the Andes.

  • Houses support 10 population.
    Replaced by: Eagle warriors are 5%/15%/25% cheaper in the feudal/castle/imperial age.

-Gameplay: Incas need some sort of escalating strength that can support aggressive and defensive playstyles. Aztecs have fast production of military units and Mayans cheap foot archers (including plumed archers). Here Incas will have a weaker discount which only affects eagles. Also, Incas have the weakest eagles in most situations, except for when they are facing archers.
-Historical background: As the Inca Empire grew, an army created by a loose confederation of peasant warriors was replaced by one of professional officers. Inca battalions contained permanent staff (generals and officers) and non-permanent personnel composed of drafted hatun runas (common men), who would be serving their military mita (public service), comparable to mandatory military service or the draft. Once the mit’a was fulfilled, each hatun runa would return to their respective ayllu (community).Each battalion was made up of a single ethnic group, the whole group being directed by a kuraka (warlord) of the same ethnicity. In the event that a kuraka fell in battle, a replacement was appointed from within the same ethnic group. In order to prevent rebellions and to promote successful performance in battle, two battalions were formed per ethnic group, each one under the command of a general (and both under the command of the kuraka). Promotion was given to the general who gave the greatest display of bravery on the battlefield, which led to competition between the two battalions. Commoners were considered to have fulfilled their military service obligations after six or seven years. The professional officers, however, were permanent soldiers, paid by the state. This military caste enjoyed several privileges, with the state paying for their food, clothing and housing costs, as well as supplying gifts such as coca, jewellery, and wives.

  • Buildings cost -15% stone.
    Replaced by: Trade units move 35% faster. Stacks with the Caravan tech.

-Gameplay: This is a civ bonus useful only in team games. Since the Incas’ new role is a fast countering civilization. They’ll need a lot of gold to train different kinds of soldiers to help their allies on different fronts. To fulfill their role, the incas will have to shift rapidly between training their core army and training the counter units to several enemies at the same time.
-Historical background: The Qhapaq ñan (royal road) was the Inca road system. It was the most extensive and advanced transportation system in pre-Columbian South America. It was at least 40,000 kilometres (25,000 mi) long. The roads were bordered, at intervals, with buildings to allow the most effective usage: at short distance there were relay stations for chasquis, the running messengers; at a one-day walking interval tambos allowed support to the road users and the flocks of carrying llamas. Administrative centers with warehouses for re-distribution of goods were found along the roads. Towards the boundaries of the Inca Empire and in new conquered areas pukaras (fortresses) were found. The Incas used the road system for a variety of reasons, from transportation for people who were traveling through the Empire to military and religious purposes. The road system allowed for a fast movement of persons from one part of the Empire to the other: both armies and workers used the roads to move and the tambos to rest and be fed. It also allowed for the fast movement of information and valuable small goods which traveled through the chasquis. The Incas gave priority to the straightness of the roads, whenever possible, to shorten the distances.

Team bonus:

  • Farms are built 100% faster.
    Replaced by: Teammates start with 1 inca llama.

-Gameplay: Results in 44 food for teammates. Coupled with the inca civ bonus, incas will end up with 2 inca llamas.
-Historical background:

The saracens are fine. They just need a little tweak.

Civ bonus

  • Camel units are now granted +10 hit points.
    Replaced by: Camels and mamelukes are created 10% faster.


  • Zealotry: Camels and mamelukes +20 hit points. Costs 500 food and 450 gold.
    Replaced by: Camels and mamelukes +30 hit points. Costs 700 food and 700 gold.

Unique unit

  • Mamelukes cost 55 food and 85 gold.
    Replaced by: Mamelukes cost 65 food and 75 gold.

-Gameplay: Pretty much everything self explanatory
-Historical background: Represents their zealotry better, and reinforces their in-game concept as fanatic camel riders.


That’s a big one.

Teutons: sure their paladins are worse against archers than generic ones but they still have it better than cavalier or Byz/Celt/Burg paladins. So giving them pierce armour would be too much.

People love to hate the free murder hole and herbal medicine, which are actually fine bonuses. Meanwhile the refund idea just blows. Like why do you think Madrasah is the worst UT in the whole game and they gave up on giving such a bonus to Burgundian? Plus it goes against the Ironclad UT that is designed to help you keep your siege alive.

Lastly, trash wars is like the situation that happens the least often in-game. And Teutons still have it better than meso civs, and ofc who would want to buff those in trash wars?

Indian: not the worst idea ig. Actually changing food to wood cost alone could be worth it.

Turks: straight nerf 11 Spearmen would be still woefully useless because their bonus damage is too weak to beat castle age cav, and skirms get outranged by xbows no matter what while not dealing enough bonus damage to cav archers.

Spanish: why does thinking gunpowder is too innacurate and then proposing the most unsignificant value increase is so trendy

Incas: pls top equating no tower rush = no more Incas It’s kind of weird how you argue their eco bonuses are SO GOOD for tower rushing but become useless for anything else. It just doesn’t make sense. Even stone savings remain useful in feudal age to be able to defend with a tower and then having enough stone for a TC without mining later. Regarding gold savings, you have stone savings instead. And "versatility’ is nothing new for Incas. They totally don’t need the dumbest eco bonus in the game to help them at all. And 15 f 38 g eagle warriors in imp is just stupid. Seriously. And why would you replace the stone discount with a TG only bonus? Like best thing would be to make the trade bonus replace the current useless TB and then the civ is 100% fine.

Saracen: uh this is a straight nerf? That doesn’t actually make it feel like they are more fanatical or something?

The historical backgrounds are nice tho.


yea let’s make teuton paladins even harder for achers to take down. let’s do the math. 180 HP paladins with 8 PA would take from a fully upgraded Arbalest - 10 damage - 8 armor, for a total of 2 damage. that means it would take arbs 180/2= 90 shots to kill a Teuton Paladin.
considering they already survive an extra hit from halbs and laugh at monks anyway with their extra conversion resistance, this would be just insane.

except now turks has problems during the early game again. furthermore it really isn’t going to do anything to make their spears and skirms more useful.

yes lets take one of the most cost effective units in the game and make it even cheaper.

they really don’t need camels made faster - i’m all for making Mamelukes cheaper and created faster though.

too expensive.


too long; didnt read

1 Like

Woah, that must have taken you quite a while to think up and write up.

→ Teutons

I would not change them. Their win-ware is fine, their skirms are serviceable in Castle Age. Bad civ matchups exist in the game, and I think that’s fine, not every civ needs to be a generalist like Byzantines. They can (mostly) handle foot archers just fine with their Siege, cavalry archers being the most threatening overall due to their mobility. Even then, not all is lost, because if a cav archer army runs away, you can roll your Teuton deathball into the enemy base and wipe it out (obviously not always the case, if your eco gets shrekt by the cav archers then you’re dead).

→ Indians

The Indians are a funny one, because on some maps they are incredibly strong, and on some maps they’re pretty bad. I think they need some tweaking with the Camels, lacking that armor compared to older patches really hurts them. As for the EA, yeah, the EA sucks, but it’s difficult for me to say whether your suggestion would make it a more viable unit than it is now. I think the main problem of the EA is that it doesn’t have a role, isn’t particularly good at anything, and has way too many counters.

→ Turks

The +1 PA bonus is much better than your replacement would be. Turks get free upgrades on the unit, so that synergizes well. The extra PA makes them an excellent raiding unit. The +10 HP on units I’d still literally almost never make, would be a terrible tradeoff.

→ Spanish

Imho the main problem is that they now have an armor class that makes them vulnerable to skirms, this probably hit them too much. I’d consider reverting this change instead.

→ Incas

They are completely fine as they are now. The upcoming nerf is rather unfortunate and silly.

→ Saracens

I think your changes would actually make the civ worse than now.

Actually, my original idea was to apply the bonus since the feudal age. But scouts with +10 hp would be too strong in that age. Because of that I thought an option would be to make it escalate +5hp/10/15 starting is feudal but I don’t know if their skirms would be balanced in imperial. So I went with the current suggestion istead.

But eagles are easy to counter in the feudal and imperial age. Sure, during the castle age that might rough. Also that wasn’t my first idea. I initially thought something like barrack units that dont cost gold get +1 attack starting in castle age (+2 total).

Eh, but that’s cheaper than the old cost.

I don’t know, man. They were pretty ok before. Their only weak points were the mamelukes price and creation rate; besides their transition from knights to camels was awkward in mid castle-early imperial age. Thats why, I included camels in the faster creation time bonus.

if you have champs and supplies - yes. but without not so much.

That would be only one more HP than Franks but without the eco to sustain it behind. But still worse than +1 pierce armour anyway for the Turk civ.

There is no question Turk skirms would still be bad in imp even with +15 HP

Eagles are designed to be weak in feudal age anyway (one whole minute just to train one!) so this is not a problem, and it’s not because they are defeated by various kind of heavy cav and infantry in imp that they need to become more cost-efficient than Goth spam.

This on the other hand, is incredibly weak. That’s literally Burmese but worse. The difference of power between the eagle discount and this is so huge they can’t be compared.

But does it mean their new camel bonus should be nerfed in exchange? And yes 10% faster camel creation is super weak (it would be 19,8s instead of 22) especially since they already are created 8 seconds faster than the knights they counter. More HP ends being a much more helpful bonus.

Actually just having champs is enough, and two handed swords from most civ are enough if you don’t have anything else.

Except, even civs with no food bonuses can scout rush effectively. And now that you mention franks, they prove how valuable their hp is in feudal. Give them more and feudal turkish scouts will be too powerful.
Following the HP topic, if you give them more, they’ll be close to mongol hussars with full upgrades in the imperial age.
Turks are an imperial civ. They don’t need anything that would make them too aggressive in previous ages. They just need better defensive answers to enemies in the feudal and early castle ages, so they can get to the imperial age easier.

As I wrote before, Turks are an imperial civ. When they reach it, their only weaknesses are specilized archer civs and gold shortage. Even with +1PA, there are tons of ways those civs can block hussars from closing in, which is totally fine. The thing is Turks need a ranged option to face archers; just a little bit of reliable ranged help, nothing else. Now you say +15hp skirms is bad, but in terms of hit points that’s basically an elite skirm with extra +43% hp. That’s not bad, that’s OP coupled with heavy gun powder fire and siege.

Yep, you are right. But it has to be something historically accurate. All I know is that their bonus should benefit either eagles or halberdiers in some way.

scout rush? yes. effectively? not so much. all the best civs for scout rushes have some bonuses working to make them get up faster and stronger. why do you think no one talks about Teutons scout rush?

not really - because again franks has bonuses working together to get them their scouts.

why do you think Franks have the best knight rush, and not say Teutons? because Franks has two eco bonuses working in conjunction to make theirs better and faster.

but they need something to make sure they get to the point where they are good -and frankly they lacked that for 20 years.

but frankly i’m not sure how you even thought 8 pierce armor teuton paladins would be anything close to fair and balanced.

Yes, I know where you are coming from. And I agree. But look at it another way: Turks are supposed to be defensive until the imperial age. Bulky spearmen and skirms can repel scout and archer rushes. Bulky scouts to kill off those that are running away and perhaps snipe a couple of villagers. The idea is to save resources to age-advance fast. You are not going to create 5 or 6 scouts and headbutt your opponent. Since even if you are successful, you are just going to get delayed. That’s why Turks usually get stuck in the castle age. In team games, it’s even easier since your team helps you. On the other hand, I agree with you it’s the lack of economic bonuses that’s holding them back. It’s just that the devs are nerfing walling, which makes harder to play defensive. And +1AP scouts are not enough. Thus I think they need something that improves their trash units without giving them upgrades.

The reason was that since that’s an imperial bonus pierce stat and in that age armies are mixed, they’d get countered by pikes, camels, etc. Paladins would lose the imperial +1 meele armor making them more vulnerable. But looking at your numbers, it seems cavalry-only extra meele armor is preferred.

but won’t do crap in castle age.

except you’re not really going to save resources - and if you honestly think saving resources to advance faster is going to give them a game changer look at byzantines. they are middle of the road at absolute best with 25% cheaper trash, and that trash actually scales better then your spears/scouts/skirsm with extra hp.
so you basically make turks a worse byzantines.

actually it is - it gives them a decent scout rush that the opponent only has 1 option against. spears.
is it making them a top tier civ? no. but it made them mid tier which is far better then turks ever was before the pa buff.

maybe so - but you’re forgetting about team games. camels and pikes would get wrecked by the other teams archers. meanwhile 90 arb hit to kill paladins would just shrek.

Hussars can be used as a raiding unit very effectively. That is, not really doing the fighting in your main army (not that they can not do it, and of course it’s often the way to use them), but just streaming into the enemy base to harrass villagers and damage the eco. That’s where the extra pierce armour really helps them perform. So if you manage to send enough of them into your enemy’s base, you might be able to force the enemy to use (some) of his army to deal with it.

The extra pierce armour is also useful in Feudal Age, because it means using archers to take our your scouts is actually pretty difficult.

That’s the thing though, the mongol hussar is more suited at soaking up melee damage, and the turk hussar is more suited at soaking arrow fire, which is exactly what you want actually.

The +10 HP will generally not help you as much in soaking arrow fire as the extra pierce armor does, so your suggestion is actually worse (for pierce resistance) than what is already in game.

Several changes sound good to me.

I really like the second one, while I feel the first one as a bit too strong…

This should be implemented imo.

I think this may result as a nerf for them, and they do not need one…

Let us wait how the upcoming nerf will change them…

This can work. Spanish need just a small buff. I would be more interested in a buff of their builders as someone is suggesting in other topics.

I would add that some civs are still underpowered. Assuming all the balance changes will be applied, Italians and Cumans are still too mediocre in Arabia.

And, personally, I do not think sicilians are going to be changed in a way making them fun to play…

Thank you all for your feedback. Here are some edits:


  • Barracks and Stable units receive +1 meele armor in the castle and imperial age (+2 total).
    Replaced by: Stable units receive +1 meele armor in the castle age and +1 meele armor in the imperial age. (+2 total)
  • Murder Holes and Herbal Medicine are free.
    Replaced by: Siege workshop units return 25% gold when they are destroyed.


  • Scout Cavalry line gain +1 pierce armor.
    Replaced by: Scout Cavalry line gain +1 pierce armor. Skirmishers gain +10 hit points.


  • New: Conquistadors and hand cannoneers gain +10% accuracy.


  • Incas start with a free llama.

  • Villagers benefit from Blacksmith infantry upgrades.
    Replaced by: Eagle scout upgrades for free
    -Historical background: As the Inca Empire grew, an army created by a loose confederation of peasant warriors was replaced by one of professional officers. Promotion was given to the general who gave the greatest display of bravery on the battlefield, which led to competition between the two battalions. Commoners were considered to have fulfilled their military service obligations after six or seven years. The professional officers, however, were permanent soldiers, paid by the state.

  • Houses support 10 population.
    Replaced by: Farms support 5 population
    Historical background: In the Inca Empire, society was tightly organized. Land was divided in roughly equal shares for the emperor, the state religion, and the farmers themselves. Individual farmers were allocated land by the leader of the ayllu. The allocations of land to individual farmers depended upon kinship, social status, and number of family members. The farmers were expected to produce their own sustenance from the land they were allocated.

  • Buildings cost -15% stone.

  • Team bonus: Farms are built 100% faster.
    Replaced by: Trade units move 25% faster.


  • Camel and mamelukes are granted +10 hit points.
    Replaced by: Camel and mamelukes are granted +10 hit points and their creation time is 10% faster.

  • Mamelukes cost 55 food and 85 gold.
    Replaced by: Mamelukes cost 65 food and 75 gold.


I still don’t think Incas need a compensatory buff but free eagle warrior upgrade sounds like a legit bonus idea at least. Not completely bonkers but useful, especially against archer civs. Farm giving more pop space tho? It wouldn’t give any benefit in the dark age most of the time, and when it does it would be pretty much towards the end of it. Sounds less benefical than the house bonus.

An Infantry civ without any direct bonus, sure…

Almost useless.

Arquebus says hi

Fair one

Hey, thanks for your reply. I always welcome your feedback.
Yeah, their dark age and early feudal will be slowed down a little bit since they get insta eagle upgrades. And as you said, they still have that -15% stone to protect themselvs with a tower.
About the farms, it’s like an indirect and more rigid teuton farms discount. Teutons save 24 wood for every farm and they can use that wood on whatever they want.
Here incas will save 25 wood (that should have been for a house), except it only affects population and will start to be worthy in castle age. Again the eagle upgrade is supposed to make up for it.

I like this very much. Finally TK riding siege towers will be viable. Those useless things always get destroyed and are expensive as hell. I can already see TK rushes <3
I’d increase it to 33% tho

Sooo… we need rename Civ Specialization. Teutons are no longer Infantry Civ, they are now Cavalry Civ.

Nothing wrong with this bonus.

Spanish already have bonus for gunpowder. I think HC should have buffed accuracy as unit, not as Civ bonus.

Like it.

Not nessecery. But interesting concept. But I think better would be:

  • Drop-off points support 5 population

Too fast. Only +10% on top of Caravan is enough to make Trade Carts faster than CA

1 Like