Champions seem fine

Yeah, champions seem weak on paper when compared to something like a Paladin. But in the very late game with lack of gold. (even in team games with trade) They are overall are the best unit. They kill trash units with ease. They are a cheap gold unit and do lots of damage to buildings. Masses of champs melt trash units over all. We are talking about the late game, gold mines are gone. Infantry civs work great here, since their champions will be stronger than normal.

Does anyone else agree? Or do champions need a buff somehow?


the only thing i would buff about the champion is the speed a bit, but frankly i’m even seeing them in HC4 a bit and they are looking good.


The unit itself is fine. The problem is transitioning into them. Too many technologies. Specially when you don’t even have MaA researched.


that is what happens when a unit is available starting in the dark age.


Champions is fine. Longswordsman is the only underwhelming transition of militia-line. Champion does not need buff but LS needs one.


Champion definitely okay after the supplies buff. Everyone talked abt arbalest again them, but u could do sth to counter arbalest. Just champion isnt the play in open map

What about this LS buff?

LS: +1 melee armor
2HS: +1 melee armor, -1 attack (so that it is not downgraded in terms of armor), +5 HP

Extra armor helps them against pikes, camels, light Cavalry, eagles etc. Extra attack can be good against villagers (need only forging to take out villager in 4 hits) but LS won’t be used as raiding units (except for Malians)

Notice absolutely no change to the stats of the champion. If anything, the upgrade cost can be decreased a bit, which just helps in tech switching a bit, but the unit is fine and doesn’t need changes.


won’t do much, LS already don’t see much use because their role is not really necessary in castle age. the best buff for the LS in my opinion, short of something drastic and unlikely like changing the entire design of the militia line, is making the upgrade and supplies cheaper and faster.

this won’t really help the unit but it helps streamline teching into them.


Ill have to do the math but 1 extra attack makes the infantry civ LS more appealing. I think the Burmese one is already cost effective v kts, i wonder how +1 would help them.

Obviously won’t make them a meta unit but slightly more appealing at least.

But still agree it more important to discount supplies and the upgrade price

and yet how often do you see burmese making longswords vs knights? furthermore why would i use longswords in that role when i could use pikes which are cheaper and faster. i understand your thoughts but buffing them vs cavalry is counter productive when pikes exist.

Especially since Burmese can just make arambai to destroy most knight civs.

We just need 2 viable infantry regional units and give champions line a bonus against them.

They are very good against eagles if You could make 9 or 10 civs have a eagles like unit champions would be a viable counter in many matches.

Of course the trick is making this new units and not to make them OP but still very viable

Honestly the LS is doomed to be a niche unit because every buff idea that was mentioned wouldn’t do anything really and I’m pretty sure the devs have thought this through too.

Give them speed: Are Celts using LS?
Give them armor: Are Teutons using LS?
Give them pierce armor: Are Malians using LS?
Give them faster attack: Are Japanese using them?
Give them more HP: Are Vikings using them?
Give them more attack: Are Burmese using them?
Make their upgrades cheaper: Are Bulgarians using them?

Maybe if we gave them a mix of multiple small buffs they would be more viable in Castle Age, but for what? The only thing they do is counter Eagles who conveniently can pick the fights and cost like no food. If you tech into LS in Castle Age you are ruining your eco and usually can’t even counter attack. LS is doomed to be a defensive unit (not even like trash that you can use offensively).

The only buff idea that would take them out of their niche is maybe to make them more like Karambits so you can win with numbers instead of good units. But that’s something you are already do in Imp.


i pretty much pointed this out months ago. it would take numerous buffs to make it to the point LS actually see common use.

1 Like

Yea it’s a bummer. At this point the only thing I see would be a major infantry overhaul but why would anyone do that. The game is basically knight play and why touch something that (mostly) worked fine for 20+ years

A major infantry overhaul would basically throw balance into chaos for at least 6 months as well. also how do you make it work, does cav, infantry and archers become a game of rock paper scissors? what if you get a bad civ matchup because of that?

It would basically require for a complete balance overhaul and that’s more modding territory.
What I find curious though is that there is not one useful infantry unit in Castle Age (besides the huskarl, a melee skirm). I feel like supplies and the Serjeant were both attempts to introduce infantry play but it’s just to weak in comparison to established options.

eagles, pikes, and of course woads/berserks tend to be useful.

1 Like

Yes and no, eagles and pikes have their good niche and to me count as well established.
Also I’m afraid I missed I meant gold infantry. Woads and berserks are really just meh in Castle Age and I’d rather go Celt/Viking knights over them.

you forgot “Make them cheaper: Are Goths using them?” or “Make them train faster: Are Goths using them?”

wait… they are