Does Supplies Need A Buff?

I don’t think this is a good idea.

I seen guys wanting to see supplies buffed. Basically make the militia both cheaper in food and gold. I seen in a post bloodline affects far more units than supplies. So, supplies is the bloodlines for infantry. With that end, they basically asking for supplies to do the same effect to the entire infantry line in the barracks. I feel this would nerf castle infantry units even more however. Unless, it’s also effects castle UUs.

Over all, I’m not sure if this break the game.


Reduce supplies cost by 50f. Buff certain UU infantry IF needed. But thats likely only karambit, samurai and jag (least needed)


Gold cost reduction would be overkill, since they are already very cheap (20g). It’s cost is also balanced because the food you will save in the long run, and you only make it when you really want to invest on the militia line.

Completely unecessary. samurai is balanced already because it is better than champion in everything except for cost, and every buff for karambit would probably make them too much op, since you can make 2 for 1 pop cost.

Supplies is already a big buff, cant see how it should further be buffed. So unfair to civs without it

i’d just reduce the cost and the research time.


If supplies does get a buff then the Goths automatically get nerfed.

1 Like
 Completely unecessary. samurai is balanced already because it is better than champion in everything except for cost, and every buff for karambit would probably make them too much op, since you can make 2 for 1 pop cost.

Not quite true, Champion has more base damage, higher bonus against eagles, higher bonus against buildings, and due to being trained from Barracks they are also considerably easier to mass.

1 Like

Although this would be an indirect nerf for slavs, one of the most balanced civs

Maybe supplies could also decrease UU infantry unit food cost by some margin? Jaguars, TKs, Woad Raiders, Berserkers, Shotel warriors, Ghbetos, Throwing axemen, Kamayuks and Samurais would be (even) more viable.

1 Like

These definitely don’t need any buff. Some of the others are debatable, too, but most of the inf UU definitely could use some buff.


The magnitude of supplies doesn’t need to be buffed. -15f makes the militia line a very well-rounded unit for it’s cost.

The problem is with the militia-line itself compared to other units. It simply lacks a competitive advantage compared to using other units.

You realise we can say the same thing about the serjeant, meanwhile its almost hot garbage. i like how you just brush off cost like it means nothing…

In most cases the Japanese champ is better than the samurai due to production, utility and cost effeciency

1 Like

Yes samurai lacked the speed of berserk (just a bit) to chase archers down, and 30G per unit. I personally dont get to sumurai, unless i get some uu to counter. If cost efficiency not accounted, then everyone would use the strongest unit

no. tcs need a nerf

longswords should get free armor from TC arrows

a 375 resource building shouldn’t be able to do so many things: villager factory + mill + mining camp + lumbercamp + fortress

if the slow-moving anti-building unit can’t counter the eco building, things are not right


You can actually bring down a fully garrisoned TC in castle age with only 15 long swordsmen w/ arson. You’ll lose about half of them. The problem isn’t that the TC is too strong, the problem is somehow getting them past the (quick) walls, past the buildings, and past any knights/archers.

I would have Supplies decrease the food cost of all infantry units by 20%.

After that, I add a secondary effect to a limited pool of units - the spear line and the eagle line - to increase the food cost by 25%.

What does this do? Sword line and all Infantry UUs - present and future all - get a 20% food cost decrease. The numbers work out in such a way that eagles and Spears aren’t affected at all.

A 60F infantry unit will cost 48F then. An 85F Teutonic Knight would cost 68F, same as Malay 2HS in Post Imperial Age.

1 Like

Lots of infantry are already appropriately priced though in the sense that lowering their food cost could pose problems. Condos, kamayuks, throwing axemen, huskarls, maybe some others.

It’s really only a handful that need individual tweaking.

1 Like

Goths will never have supplies due to their bonus.

Flemish Militia are also not a problem because Burgandians miss Supplies.

Yeah I misspoke about the Huskarls. But what about the: Celts, Ethiopians, Franks, Incas, Italians, Japanese, Malay, Malian, Sicilians, Teutons, and Vikings?

These UUs have enough variety in use, balance, cost effectiveness, etc. such that a uniform 20% food cost reduction can’t really be justified on grounds other than ‘it makes the new tool tip simple to describe’.

1 Like
  1. Hence i wrote “(even) more viable” → I thought it was obvious that i just listed the UUs of the factions that have access to supplies, though i forgot the sicilians and malay - sorry about that.

  2. The margin might not be set the same for all the civs → I personally think that Franks, Malay and Incas (Incas in exchange for some tiny eco boost) should lose the supplies, but Gbetos and Samurais are debatable, and reducing their food cost by ~5-10 food through supplies is very well welcome even for these units;)