Boyars and Konniks need changes

At the Bulgarians and Slavs part, he never mentions those UUs as recommended for some situations, while Keshiks, Leiciai, Cataphracts, Coustiliers, Magyar Huszars are suggested here, while others like Tarkans, Samurai, Jaguar Warrior, Teutonic Knights and War elephants aren’t mentioned but mostly because they have more specialized/specific roles, Im now concerned about those two because:

  • Konniks now have a barely noticable difference from Bulgarian Cavaliers, by just being better vs counters because of the dismounted version, while also having less HP and PA than paladin, plus having a ROF that’s just 0,1 faster than cavalier, and the dismounted version having an amazing 2.4 ROF.
  • Boyars, with the Detinets UT and armor buffs is now in the right direction, but I mean, right now most cav UUs have lower gold cost that make them viable in Imperial Age, Boyars are easy to use once you have a castle because of the 50f cost and 15 secs TT, but by the time you have a castle, you are either to Imperial and the gold starts to run out, and 80G makes Boyars unsuitable to be massed easily, even with cheaper castles.

While I agree they both may be fine in TGs, in 1v1s I start to think they need some buffs:

  • After the major nerfs made to the Konnik, they now need a bit better ROF (I always propose from 2.4 to 2.2) so while they have lower resistance, let them have some fast ROF again. Also, Bagains should affect dismounted Konnik to offset the 2.4 ROF.
  • Boyars probably need maybe changing the cost from 50f and 80g to 70f and 60g, will be harder to use in castle age but in Imperial costing 20 less gold will help to mass them in Imperial age with Detinets, or maybe increasing the attack of Elite Boyar from 14 to 16 so they have enough difference from paladins, or hell even a 10 extra HP for elite.

Konniks also have specialized roles, by falling and surviving they create distraction while being chased.

Boyars have the same role as Cataphract I would say. Engaging Infantry and avoiding archers.

Konniks have no real uses imho.
Plus Bulgarians’ Hussars are really strong in melee against anything that’s not heavy cavalry, camels or pikes.
Against other heavy cavalry you have buffed cavaliers that win 1v1 against any other more or less, against camels I wouldn’t throw Konniks. Konniks are nice and all, but imho it’s not like Bulgarians really need them.

I like this idea. I also think Konniks are kind of in a weird place, because you’d rather make Cavalier or Hussar, since they don’t really fit an unused role right now. I guess they’re also a unit that’s hard to balance, since they used to be really OP.

With low PA, Archers would still do fine (and Dismounted Konniks are really slow anyways), so Bagains affecting the dismounted ones would at least make them more useful in melee fights.

I think Boyars are in an okay spot though. Perhaps they’re unviable in 1v1s, but they’re already very strong in TGs. Just because Hera - who is a very meta player - doesn’t mention them doesn’t mean they’re weak. He also says Genoese are unviable in 1v1s as they’re so slow to get going, so I’d say it’s the same with Boyars.

1 Like

Boyars aren’t much better against halbs than Paladin iirc

the big difference between Cataphract and Boyar is that Boyars are really good against other heavy cav, ie they counter Paladins and Cataphract, whereas Cataphracts are countered by heavy cav

Also, Cataphracts are notably weaker than Paladins against Archers, whereas Boyars boast a very high PA. Their design necessitates a high price, since they are so powerful and pretty much only countered by counters. Slavs have really good answers to both Camels and Halberdiers, too.


If Slavs had Paladins, they wouldn’t need Boyars at all.
Boyars are just the Slavs’ version of Paladins. Same use, same purpose.
Yes they do good against other heavy cavalry, but they don’t annihilate them the way TK do to most infantry units, at the same time they perform similarly against archers (more or less, since they have less HP).
I honestly find Boyars quite uninspiring by design. It’s like removing arbalests from a civ, then replace them with a UU with same attack, same attack speed, same range, 2 more armor but 5 less hp. Wow, how interesting.

Seems interesting, but it’ll be too powerful as halberdier, camel, and any cavalry are struggling hard just to kill them, so the result will be significantly different. Moreover, Konniks themselves already have so many upgrades while Bagains is quite expensive. The dismounted ones will also be awkward when they have more armor than the mounted version Imo it’ll be fine to make stirrups affect dismounted Konniks since stirrups is a must tech when playing as Bulgarians. It can also be easier to include Dismounted Konniks into Stirrups information.

They are slightly the same. FU halberdier kills Leitis, Boyar, Paladin, Tarkan, and Keshik in 5 hits. However, Leitis with at least 2 relics have a much better advantage as it kills FU halberdier in 3 hits while being cheaper in term of gold trade.

Konniks are weird. I think they have their useage, but imo it’s good they aren’t that goto unit for bulgarians. Cause they have the same issues like a lot of the newer units:
Leitis, Keshik, Coustillier, Ratha …
They are all extremely hard to counter because of the way they are designed.
That’s a huge problem in my opinion.

For Boyars in my opinion the best tweak would be to reduce the production time. To like 12 or even 10 secs. This way it would be way easier to get to them in shorter 1v1s. You could also debate about giving the castle age 120 HP (+20) and the imp version 140 HP (-10). That would reduce their strength in teamgames. You could even argue about taking away the last pierce armor from the elite boyar cause it’s in 1v1 usually not a choice against archer or even cav civs anyways. There Slavs usually jsut spam their hussars and add siege behind.
So it’s usually only a choice vs knight civs anyways and should be treated like that.

1 Like

heres where i disagree with you.

these are IDEAL compositions, like the best possible composition you can make.

the Boyar is not a bad unit by any stretch, but Slavs Halb/Siege is just amazing.


I think Boyar needs buff neither in Castle nor in Imperial Age. It has +2 attack, +2 MA than Knight and it is cheaper because 10 food is more valuable than 5 gold in Castle Age. Keeping production speed low is necessary because everyone would go fast Castle build, spam better and cheaper Knight from Castle just like Mongols gooes Mangudai, or newly going Coustillier with Burgundians. 15 seconds is equal to 2 Stable production which is not too slow btw.

As for Imperial Age, you pay 1000f 600g 60 seconds for Elite Upgrade and you gain a unit is equal to Paladin (even little stronger in my opinion). Cavalier + Paladin upgrades are 1600f 1050g 270 seconds in total. I don’t mind cost of Paladin upgrade but research time in total (270 seconds) is really high. Boyar ,with 60 seconds time, knocked opponent down before opponent prepared for aggression which is main strategy with heavy cavalry units in Imperial Age. Boyar is like stronger version of Sicilians Cavalier. If Slavs have 3 Castles, it will happen no production problem.

I don’y know why Pros don’t use this strategy frequently. They probably think late game Slavs Hussar, siege and Halberdier is too strong, thus I won’t risk the game with early Imperial agression with Boyars.

1 Like

Slavs are a garbage civ now

1 Like

Because you don’t underestand the basic concepts of timing and a few other more abstract ones.
Like easy accessible, initial cost, eco setup…

ALL cavalry UUs suffer from the same problem, that’s why some of the other cav UUs like coustillier have been designed completely OP just otherwise there is basically no incentive to make them over knights.

Elite Boyar’s timing is even better than Hauberk Cavalier. Only 60 seconds 1000f 600g for Elite upgrade. Hauberk cost 700f 600g + Cavalier upgrade 300f 300g 100 seconds. Total cost of Hauberk Cavalier: 1000f 900g 100 seconds. Slavs eco is better than Sicilians at this stage of the game (Early Imperial) with 10% faster farmers. Boyar is better unit with +2 attack, +10 hp and +6 MA.

Coustillier was OP. However, with new change Coustiller isn’t that strong anymore. it doesn’t one shot Monk and Arbalest anymore. I think this will change a lot. Coustillier villager killing ability is also nerfed. it kill Villager in 2 hits before, now it is nerfed to 3 hits. Burgundians Cavalier kills Villager in 4 hits and doesn’t lose bonus attack after first hit. Coustillier is still very strong unit, maybe it needs aonther nerf.

because you are wrong in your first statement. Sicilian cavalier can fight halbadiers quite a lot better than Boyars while costing less gold.

also you can make 8 stables way more easily than you can make 4 castles, which are also needed to make trebs etc in imperial age

Sicilians Cavalier tanks 6 hit from Halberdier, Boyar Tanks 5 hits, however Boyar kills Halberdier in 4 hits, Sicilians Cavalier kills in 5 hits. In conclusion, Boyar is stronger against Halberdier. Against Camel, Boyar is better again. Against Arbalest, Sicilians Cavalier is better but both of them counter Arbalest convincingly. Against other Cav, 1 Boyar is like equal to 2 Cavalier.

It is one of the most common wrong belief in the game. 10 food is more valuable than 5 gold until very late game. Boyar is slightly cheaper than Cavalier in practical game.

Did you see non-stop 8 Stable Cavalier production in games. 8 Stable is more than enough. Similary 4 Castle is more than enough. 3 Castle is probably enough but Slavs might want to 4th castle in order to avoid any trouble. New castle tech is created for Castle spam, thus building 4 Castle wouldn’t be problem. Nowadays, pros are buildings a lot of castle btw.

Sicilian cavaliers used to tank more then that. and hits to BE KILLED is more important then hits to Kill. it’s why you see pros going for defense upgrades instead of offense upgrades on cavalry first in almost every situation.

but the big thing here is that Boyar require a castle. it’s a heck of a lot easier to spam Stables then castles.

which is exactly when you’re actually going to be able to field boyar. it’s not like you can hit castle age and drop 3 castles right away. by the time you have enough castles to convincingly field boyar, you’re probably on your way to imp at minimum.

okay now tell us, which is easier to field, 8 stables or 3 castles? furthermore 8 stable production beats 3 castles for most civs, you’d need at least 4 castles to keep up with 8 stables.

a lot of castles? not really, not even as slavs. remember the first castle still costs full price. - maybe in ladder games they can spam them, but there isn’t money on the line, but in tournaments the most I’ve seen is 4 lately, and that isn’t often. and you also need those castles to be producing trebuchets, not just your UU.

heck, Slavs weren’t even used in the two most recent tournaments.

If they really want to make Boyar a better unit, changing up the food and gold cost to be a little more food slanted is a GOOD idea. Especially on a civ with a bonus that draws in food faster. (which by the way, I think could be buffed up a little bit).

Is this really the reason? I think it is not. Armor upgrade enables to tank more arrows from achers and TCs, that’s why pros goes armor upgrades first. In pure Knight vs Knight battles, I saw actually attack upgrades researched earlier by Pros.

Old Siclians Cavalier was better against Boyar but new Boyar is better now. You can test, you will see that Boyar performs better against equal number of Halberdiers.

In early Castle Age, building Castle is problem but in late Castle Age, players goes 2-3 Castles. I saw a lot of pro matches recently where both sides builded 3-5 Castles only for defence (they created no unique units most of the time, only builded Trebs).

Let’s say you have 1 castle in mid Castle Age. Is there a obstacle that stop from you producing Boyar. It is stronger version of Knight with slight cheaper cost. This remind me a game in which Viper builded Castle in Castle Age with Burgundians and he created only Cavalier, didn’t create any Coustillier, he idled his Castle for no reason. It was stupid idea because Coustillier is stronger version of Cavalier with a lot cheaper cost. Why don’t you create Coustillier in Castle Age, create Coustillier and Cavalier both. Similarly, Slavs player must create Boyars together if he have castle and goes Knights as well.

Pros don’t use Slavs because it is weak civ until late Castle Age. I think Slavs need early bonuses to survive in early game but it doesn’t mean Boyar is bad unit. It is very strong unit actually.

and that’s the reason you’re not seeing UU - trebs. they cut into UU production. meanwhile Stables or Archery ranges aren’t restricted.

and you’ll not get an argument out of me about that - but the boyars cost is prohibitive when you can actually start to use them.

how about the fact that it’s cheaper to upgrade cavalier? yeah in theory i could mix in some with my knights, but in the long run cavalier is a lot cheaper to upgrade then Boyar is. at which point my Boyar once again fall off.

They didn’t produce Trebs from all Castles. it was a lot of idle Castle time because they didn’t go Unique Units. Pros uses Castle even if they don’t need Unique units because Castle is useful buidlings even when you don’t need UU.

1000f 600g is like cost of 11 Boyar. Research time is more important than upgrade cost. Paladin upgrade (cost of 14 Cavaliers) is more expensive than Boyar’s, however, main problem is 170 seconds research time. Otherwise, 36 Paladin is stronger than 50 Cavalier. Both Boyar and Paladin upgrade compensate their cost but Paladin’s research time kills all momentum and timing. 30 Boyar is stronger than 37 Cavalier. Going Boyar is better than Cavalier in my opinion.