You do know gold is far more finite than wood right? Archer costing only gold gonna need to be super strong to make up for this.
ahem This solves that problem
not really. this is a cavalry and archer civ.
all you’ve done is made it so you don’t need as many people on wood, but you’re going to need more on gold to field your army, so its basically a wash.
Well everything else is ‘taken’ 
If we add a Slavs DLC, then current Slavs civilization have to be changed to Rus’. As mentioned elsewhere, the Slavs civilization shield is the one of Yaroslavl the Wise from Kievan Rus, the language is medieval* (??) Russian and the Kievan Rus state is the precursor of all 3 Eastern Slavic countries of Russia, Belarus & Ukraine. Poles were a separate kingdom since 900s eventually joined with Lithuanians until 18C & Bohemia is the origin of the Czech nation (also with Greater Moravia found in Magyars’ Honfoglalas Battle). Another justification to this idea is we already have another Slavicized civilization now in the Bulgarians (even though they were originally Turkic in the Russian Steppes). Muscovy is only related to a Duchy centered upon the city of Moscow (and it was in rivalry with Great Novgorod), so it is probably too small for a civilization.
I don’t know about Serbs apart from Siege of Belgrade custom campaign and Kosovo Field, but I saw another suggestion for Croatians, so rather than choosing only one of them, I think it would be awesome to have both added - even if just for the flame wars here.
3 Likes
Still. This means mangonel are far more valuable than before because each archer death from them is earning gold for mangonel owner. Skirmisher would be way too cost effective against archers. Not a good tech. Gold mine last 20% longer is also just a gold version of Mayans bonus, which was nerfed because it apparently was too good.
Croats added to my list.
1 Like
I will be working on tech trees soon, probably will open a new thread and close this one when done (with all changes made to Bohemians, Poles, Serbs and Croats).
I Really Like this from a uniqueness perspective, the only question is what would it do to balance.
Japanese want there bonus back.
i think this is weak and uninteresting.
define “heavy infantry”
3 Likes
FFS I can’t think of something already in the game lmao.
Maybe: Vitezovi and militia-line +x HP
Yes I know this all depends on ‘tech-tree’, but a strong infantry civ needs something good for infantry
I’ll try think of other options.
Ah, I meant infantry like militia-line, so good armor, average speed. These infantry will have a fast attack due to small sword size (maybe weaker to counter that a little).
design wise, infantry in this game are always going to be a support unit, short of a design overhaul.
this is due to their slow speed, low cost, and lack of range.
even the militia line isn’t really known for its armor though.
sounds a lot like a mini huskarl combined with an tk
I think the civs generally look interesting, were Croats known for conversion or spreading religion? Would’ve thought if anything something like the poles would’ve gotten the conversion bonus.
But i would personally prefer to see more Asian, African or American civs before yet more “European” civs…
Infantry is flawed in aoe2. If you think about it the only ones that are heavily used are dirt cheap counters (pikes) or very fast arrow resistant ones(eagles karls). The rest in comparison to other units aren’t used that much… So making infantry civs is knee capping yourself. Unless you make another version of goths,since archers will always be the hard counter or you perfect the karambit (make it viable without being OP)
Also ignore these trolls saying you have overlap on your techs and bonuses with existing ones. It’s impossible to avoid overlap and your civs still have a lot of unique flavour.
Maybe an idea for aj infantry civ: rams have +5 garrison. Rams can be built in the feudal age but train much slower in the feudal age only. (yes partial overlap with cumans but there’s already tons of overlap)
3 Likes
Possibly, possibly not. I think giving this bonus to Poles would be making them too powerful.
I prefer to add mine in historically relevance order.
Well I thought I needed something infantry related, and a little more than just free armor upgrades.
I try xD
Good idea but I don’t think they are relevant to Croats.
At some point you will have to ignore historical accuracy to balance the civs(eg aztecs have trebs and arbalests, mayans have the BEST eagles in the game when they shouldn’t even have eagles at all) You will have to incorporate some way to allow the civ to use infantry.
Currently in game the main ways are shielding them with rams or giving them high PA, another way is forcing the enemy to come to you (pikes around mangonels, but in this case the pikes are only support) none of the infantry civs besides goths actually main infantry.
Example. Vikings are an infantry civ but they will 95% go for archers, similarly aztecs.
Thus you need a delivery mechanism.
I mean here you are ignoring relevance and going for balance. Similarly you can do the same for other civ bonuses.
I can’t help but think that 4 civs are maybe a bit too many for a Slavic DLC…I mean, Serbians and Croatians were kinda similar…not so sure about Bohemians and Poles because of Bohemians being part of the Holy Roman Empire, and then being fairly significant during the Hussite wars.
I’d stick to the original Bohemians + Poles…and maybe Serbians as well:) We shall see, but i definitely think that a bit more Slavic countries would indeed be appropriate and cool (especially Hussite campaigns).
2 Likes
Just FYI, for the majority of AoK’s timespan, the only non-Christian neighbours that Poland had were the Pagan Lithuanians and Old Prussians. The Ruthenian principalities (and later, the Grand Duchy of Lithuania) effectively screened them from direct interaction with the steppe nomads most of the time. (with a few notable exceptions)
If you wanna stick with this theme, then using the Caucasus nations of Georgia and Armenia would be more appropriate, since they were literally surrounded by Islamic states from all sides. Also, the Vlachs would fit this as well, since Wallachia and Moldavia were constantly part of a balancing act trying to maintain nominal independence from the expanding Ottoman empire, even if it took decraring themselves a client/vassal state at times.
I think the same. We want a slavic DLC, this is why this post exists, and we wants the devs to know we are intrested, but if we keep going crazy with the amount of civs the claim lose seriousness and enters the realm of fan fiction.
Being realistic and considering that we only can get a liimited number of new civs and that most of them should cover regions outside of Europe, then the most reasonable thing to do would be to split slavs in the three branches they are traditionaly split: eastern, western and south slavs. The civs would be Rus’ (Kievan Rus and the russian principalities and duchies), Wends (poles and bohemians) and Serbs (Serbs , croats and bosnians).
I know they are sill umbrellas, but 5 civs for slavs only is an unrealistic objective.
3 Likes
I don’t have any questions, I liked it. Some of numbers can be changed I don’t need to discuss them.
Bohemian faster economy upgrades are nice, but I think Vietnamese has no wood cost. So make it just faster.
Bohemian team bonus is strong when economy bonus is weak and can be team bonus (after no ‘no wood cost’) so changing it with that economy research speed can be good.
2 Likes
Thanks for reply. I removed no wood bonus for eco upgrades. The main goal of that was to make strong agressive civilization with no really eco bonuses except from one to get eco upgrades faster ( mainly wheelbarrow ).
1 Like