Genitours cost too much food?

yes agree genitours need to cost less e.g. 40 food to get people going for them. They are also too weak against pikes, so increasing speed to 1.45 OR +4 vs pikes is needed

They at historically at the wrong civs. And they are gameplay wise with the wrong civ. Berber a got better options.

Spanish and Portuguese could actuslly use them.

2 Likes

Yes exactly, Portuguese even more than Spanish since they have very limited cavalry.

Maybe just increase their wood cost and get rid of their food cost altogether. Say 60 wood, no food. Like Persian trashbows.

Genitoirs should be a regional iberian unit, like steppe lancers, elefants, etc.

Berber can get a new team bonus then.
Trade units move 10%. or +2 pierce armor to trade
While worse for pure gold generation than Spanish, it offers extra survivability since the carts outrun meele more or surive cav archer raids better

Their trade cogs already move 10% faster as ship speed bonus applies to all ships.

Edit : I don’t think just making Genitour a regional unit will solve the problem. I’ll swap their f/w cost and reduce the wood cost to 45.
50f/35w → 35f/45w

It unironically would actually deal with a major part of the Genitours issues, that being the Berber UU already fuifills half of the role of the Genitour (killing CA), except better and it can also fight against non-archer units as well. Portuguese and Spanish do not have this issue with their roster, and the Genitour would bring more relevant ultility to their options than it currently does for the Berbers.

Non-ironically it will work only for Portuguese. Berbers one will still be as useless as it is now. Spanish with their food heavy army combo (knight and conq both cost 60f) wouldn’t be able to afford another 50f unit. And Porto’s bad matchups are against cav civs, not archer civs.

Edit : I’m not against making it a regional unit btw.

1 Like

That’s a random confusing statement, Archer civs are able to find the resources to make Mangonels when they’re necessary despite their Wood and Gold heavy army composition, Franks are able to find the resources to make Taxemen when they’re necessary despite their own Food intensive composition, etc. Just saying “Oh X thing is too Y to do Z” without any supporting information to qualify it doesn’t communicate things effectively.

Spanish are also an underperforming civ that has its lowest winrate against Archer Civs, it certainly has more need for the Genitour than Berbers currently. https://aoecompanion.com/stats/civs/spanish?elo=1250-1650&map=arabia

Except quite alot of Porto’s bad matchups actually are against Archer Civs like Ethiopians and Britons, as below website shows. Age of Statisitcs also shows similar results I believe, but I’m unable to use the Civ Winrate function for some reason https://aoecompanion.com/stats/civs/portuguese?elo=1250-1650&map=arabia

I agree, the Genitour requires additional buffs to its statistics and or a role that the Camel Archer does not fulfill, my suggestion (alongside making it avaliable to Spanish and Portuguese) is to give it the Parthian Tactics +4 bonus damage against Spearmen. (All 3 of Berbers, Spanish and Portuguese lack PTs also).

it will solve the historical ill presentation thought. because genitours were used AGAINST berbers. its a spanish word after all. balance is important sure. but this is a seroius issue to me too.

i would love to field genitours as portugese. their army is very slow normally. mostly going archers, organs, siege.
genitours would fit in well. ports are actually horrible against british becuase you lack siege rams, siege oanger, paladin and hussar.its horrible to face FU longbows, because you lack all the tools and just got elite skirmisher to trough in the meat grinder which is often super inefficient by itself without any supporting tools.
so genitours would help a lot against brits atleast.

spanish and portugese both are bad enough that giving the genitours is no balance concern.

berbers wont lose anything by getting a new team bonus. it could depending on the new teambonbus even be a buff in 1v1, which they dont need (already a top civ) thats why a trading related buff would be best in my opinion, maybe trade carts +2 pierce armor then.

also team bonus special units are actaully rly hard to balance. you cant buff genitours a lot or turkish genitours could become a problem. removing these kind cross combinations would make stuff a lot easier. unlike italian condos, which are mercennaries so it makes sense they are a teambonus, genitours have no real reason to be a teambonus.

and honestly mayan, aztec genitours are just silly

2 Likes

Yeah, I think I should elaborate.
Should say “Would very hard to afford” instead of “Can’t afford”. Usually wood collection rate is higher than food. So archer civ training 3-4 mango is not that hard. Spanish is not that good civ that can justify the double food cost of Genitour over skirms.

Yeah, true. But again I do think Genitour’s high food cost is indeed a problem.

Didn’t check latest win rate yet. Porto is one of the worst civ in land anyway. And I think they need more help to deal with cav than archer. Doesn’t mean I don’t want gens to be a regional unit.

2 Likes

genitours could get a small anti cav bonus damage like genovese crossbowmen to reflect that they were historically used to counter berber cav.

so +2 anti cav and +3 anti cav for elite.
assuming genitour shoots an cavalry unit euqal or greater armor than the genitours damage, then the unit will do 2and 3 for elite dmage per shot instead of just 1. (and no, it would not be 1 +2 or 1+3 because the normal damage is completely negated by the armor and the minimum damage of 1 is appplied afte bonus damage is taken into consideration, thats the reason organ guns +1 bonus damage against ram does completly nothing)

Maybe you didn’t heard of that Spanish “Jinete”(Genitour) actually come from Berbers tribe name of “Zenata”? Spanish did use that army, but they actually adopt from berbers/Arabs they fight against.

From Wikipedia

The Zenata (Berber language: Iznaten) are a group of Amazigh (Berber) tribes, historically one of the largest Berber confederations along with the Sanhaja and Masmuda.[1][2] Their lifestyle was either nomadic[3][4] or semi-nomadic.[5] They were famous for their horse riding ability to the point that in Spanish Jinete a version of their name became equated with mastery of the skill.

Well. I don’t think it is necessarily to go, It might be rarely used in TG, but majority of the player base aren’t high level enough need to play meta (including Single players). Most of the player just feel interested to train Genitour as Turks and it would be cool. Not all things need to be played enough in high level meta.

Also, the stat of Genitour is actually fine. It isn’t use enough because it is belong to berbers. They have Camel Archer which is very amazing against CA. Also in castle age, berbers usually go Full stable Knight/Camel to use their discount. It is more make sense to add seige against archer instead of skirms/Genitour and get both Cavalry/Archer blacksmith upgrade.

I am neutral of giving that unit Spanish/Portuguese but I don’t know… Might be Conquistador + Genitour can be too strong in certain map. If Genitour for Spanish/portuguese can be trained after research tech (Not instantly like Berbers), it would be Ok. It might be historically accurate because Berbers originally use that army and Spanish adopt from them.

1 Like

Eh their knights are pretty good and they have decent light cav.

Nothing special though, no camels and no hussars (I don’t count Paladin for 1v1). Spanish have Hussars at least. If they had genitours they might use them against CA civs. Maybe… :grin:

The thing is, the name Genitour derives from the Spanish Jinete, whose origins are likely to be Zenata, a Berber tribe. So it isn’t as historically inaccurate as some people claim.

Then call the unit zenata? Since its not. I will still say historical incorrect

Doesn’t matter where the word originated from, what matters is who used those troops.
And those troops were used by Spanish against the Berbers/Moors from early middle ages throughout the Reconquista.
So yes, the unit in the game is very historically incorrect.

Plus, to stay on topic, it’s too food heavy.


I like to think of this as a proud moment where the devs read my exact suggestion and actually used it, even though they probably never look at the forum, let alone saw my post :smile:

Imo the genitour is still a misconcept.
As a cav archer type it takes even more bonus damage from skirmishers and is countered by a unit the archer player can easily tech into anyways.
Against cav Archers it’s also not that useful cause it also dies hard to light cav, pretty much like the skirm.

So yeah… Funny buff… changes nothing.
And Berbers didn’t need a buff anyways so… that’s why nobody cares actually.