Burgundians Balance - A Subjective Opinion

As the title says this is very subjective opinion and I don’t think most of you will agree with me. I think cheaper Paladin and SO upgrade (which is a different issue) should not be a thing. Just like Archers weren’t supposed to be good against building. Obsidian Arrow was annoying without a doubt and sometimes OP but Saracens was completely fine. Their TB still exists but devs did agree that this should not be a thing.

Similarly I want cheaper Paladin and SO upgrade should be removed. These two upgrades are the most expensive upgrade in game and that’s for very good reasons.

Now my suggestion is -

  1. Get the Gold Farm bonus for free. Gold generation rate is too low to be OP. Also it is not like Burgundians eco is good. In fact the gold generation rate can be increased despite the bonus being free.
  2. Remove the 50% Stable techs discount. Instead get Cavalry armor upgrades are free.

Let’s compare old vs new-
Feudal Age
A straight forward buff. Currently Burgundians have very little to offer in feudal. You can grab all the Castle age eco techs but realistically anything other than Bow Saw is hard to justify. Having the free armor will help a lot for Scout Rush.
Castle Age
Old resource savings - 300f, 175g.
New resource savings - 250f, 150g. But you are also saving 150f from free armor in feudal. So in total it is 400f, 150g. Again a buff even in terms of resource savings. Also Knights which can potentially turn into Cavalier having +2 armor instantly will help a lot against all types of units.
Imperial Age
Old savings - 900f, 675g
New savings - 350f, 200g
A big nerf in resource savings. But I think Cavalier getting +3/+4 armor instantly has its own place. Paladin upgrade takes a long time anyway and Hussar upgrade usually comes in later stage of the game.

Total Savings
Old - 1200f (0 + 300 + 900), 850g (0 + 175 + 675)
New - 750f (150 + 250 + 350), 350g (0 + 150 + 200)
With this change you get 50% of the savings in Feudal and Castle (13.64% in feudal, 36.36% in castle) and rest 50% in Imp. Whereas now you get 0% in Feudal, only 23% in Castle and 77% in Imp. Resource savings in Imperial age is not as much important as resource savings in Imperial age.

Another option is keep Paladin upgrade unaffected by the bonus. And give them a new good eco bonus. Or a tweak like all eco upgrades research x% faster.

I also want some tweaks for both of their UU - Coustilier and Flemish Militia. But not sure what can be done to them. Let’s see what you guys think.

Should a civ get cheaper Paladin upgrade?
  • Yes. It is fine.
  • No. A civ should be designed and balanced other way.

0 voters

Free cavalry armor is actually a pretty strong bonus. It is basically applying the Indian bonus of Imperial age (basically free Plate Barding) to all ages. The most balanced is in Feudal since armor is good but not OP.

Giving random bonuses also doesn’t feel good. So I suggest something.

  1. Stable technologies cost -33% in resources.
  2. Free Scale Barding Armor (Feudal age tech).
  3. Cavalier and Hussar available in Castle Age and researches 100% faster (same as Bloodlines; also costs -33% due to 1st bonus).
1 Like

Can’t I say the same for you?


I didn’t mean to say your bonuses are random. The random bonuses I was talking about (in view of balance) are - Free Scale Bard (Feudal), Free Cavalier (Castle-Imperial).


Get the Gold Farm bonus for free. Gold generation rate is too low to be OP. Also it is not like Burgundians eco is good.

Minor, fine way to buff them; wont make them viable alone but certainly helps.

Pretty lame idea tbh. The cheap stable tech which leads to specific timings, while the free armor is a mediocre spike only against archers. Your change overall reduces possible decisions: Instead of having a bonus that can be used in different ways at different timings, you just get a free thing at a set timing. Also, its an overall pretty big nerf imho to a rather weak civ.


Just make all Eco upgrades 33% cheaper and faster, that’s all it needs to make them balanced and make use of their earlier upgrades.

Adjust flemish revolution so it doesn’t is GG anymore, maybe by only converting half the vills.

On top of the current bonuses? Or just by itself?

Because just by itself, it would be a pretty weak bonus. Only case where research time matters is wheelbarrow and handcart. 33% cheaper eco techs just by itself sounds good, but it’s worse than any of the get xyz for free bonuses.

And on top of the current bonuses, might be too strong.

nothing topic related but wouldn’t “subjective opinion” be redundant?


Burgundians lack Bloodlines and the cheaper stable techs is fine.
Cheaper SO upgrade isn’t Burgundian but Bulgarian, and they need that because they don’t have other quick and effective options against massed archers at Imperial age.


Yeah I know.

I think I couldn’t make it clear what was my subjective opinion. Made a poll in the thread. Please feel free to participate.

1 Like

On second thoughts, I don’t like your argument. Archers against buildings is a bit different, but think this:

  1. Infantry should be bad against archers: Huskarls, Malian Swordsmen and sort of Woad Raiders

  2. Archers should be weak to rams: Chu Ko Nus

  3. Infantry should have high HP and hold the lines: Gbetos, Karambit Warrios and Shotel Warriors

Obsidian arrows was a silly tech but archers being good against buildings is still there in the game. Chu Ko Nus and Kipchaks, and Saracen archers - all achieve this in different ways. Calculating dps against buildings Elite Kipchaks have 2, Saracen allied archers have 1.6, Kipchaks have 1.5, Elite Chu Ko Nus have 1.4, Chu Ko Nus have 0.85 whereas other archers have 0.55 (assumed TR for all, neglected Ethiopian bonus).

Obsidian arrows have the foot archers a dps of 3.2 against regular buildings and 6.4 against stone defences (except castles). So you see why this got oit lf hands so fast.

1 Like

I think I could not make my point clear. “Archer shouldn’t be good against building” - is a subjective opinion which someone will agree, some won’t. I actually disagreed with that. Now “A civ should not have cheaper Paladin upgrade” is also a subjective opinion. The comparison was not from the point of game balance or mechanism. Honestly I still think I just can’t use proper words to describe what I actually tried to mean.

I kinda agree. But I strongly believe if it was not an UT for Mayans which is already an S tier civ even without the UT, we wouldn’t see this tech being removed. Maybe nerfing extra dmg from +12 to +6 was enough which was done before.

Is that really though? Feudal and Castle age is a buff compared to current one. In Imp, you are in short of 450 food + 500 gold. Gold farm should give you more than 500 gold up to that point. So it is only 450 food difference in Imp. Feudal and Castle age (and even Imp) power spike should be more than enough to compensate that.

Knight with both armor can take 34 xbow shots while a knight with BL + 1st armor can take 30. Not medicore imo. Also knight with both armor but no BL wins against knight with BL but no armor. In the end it is a temporary advantage but so is current Burgundians.

I agree with this one.

Was talking about the no more stable discount, not about the extra gold from farms. And yes, that one in isolation IS a nerf. You get your spike in castle a few seconds earlier, but lose hundreds of res in early imp. I know res are not that important later on, but its just too much.

It is mediocre because when facing xbow, ANY civ can get armor+2, which means your advantage is a 60s timing window, thats it (no res because the res you save you have to invest in the more expensive chev upgrade). Thats 60s from the moment you hit castle, so we are talking about engaging with your scs, you wont have kts yet.
Note i am not saying free +2 is meaningless, but your proposed tradeoff is barely an advantage WHEN FACING THE UNITS IT HELPS MOST. When facing enemy kts, armor barely helps (its basicially worth 150 food), so trading this vs cheaper tech is a huge loss. It really comes down to the part about possible decisions: Right now, you can choose how you want to use your bonus. You propose a change that gives a minor buff vs archer civs and a nerf vs everyone else on top of a big nerf in Imp and somehow act like its a buff.

1 Like

Yeah I can see why you think this is a nerf. Fair enough.

You still save 250 food more from 2 armor than cheaper Cavalier. Even if you research Husbandry you still have +100 food.

But Cavalier research time is also a bit big - 100 seconds. Since you don’t have BL, you have to rush to this upgrade, meaning you also have to sacrifice 3 and a one-third of Knight. Now you can safely add your knights as knights with +2 armor usually perform better than knights with BL, or Cavalier without BL in this case.

Which costs resource. Instead of comparing with other civs, compare current Burgundians with new one. If currently they can afford both armor + Cavalier upgrade, new one can also afford the Cavalier upgrade since resource saving is almost same if not more (It’s not likely you will go for LC upgrade in castle age every single game).

It’s completely fine if you see this as a nerf. Lack of good eco and BL on top of that is really hard to make them a good civ imo. And we can’t give them BL either due to earlier access to Cavalier.