My ideas to balance the game

Brace yourselves, this is going to be a long one. If you get bored, please just read the point I make on the most important civilisations to balance. In the end I also talk about the UI, etc. I also comment a lot the last update (36906). More general comments are about the difference between DE (and some patches) and HD 5.8.

So first, some main ideas about civilisations and balance:
Reflexions on a few civilisations and units:

  • Byzantines are a weird case. Historically they had powerful soldiers, in the small number, and technological advantage. The game half reflects that, but the cheaper trash and the lack of two key late game techs (bloodlines and blast furnace) with no special bonus hurts a lot. I don’t know what should be done with them, and I want their identity of “fire ship, cataphract” civilisation to be kept, but the rest of the tech tree may need some thinking. Also, the civ is alright but never shines strongly (or perhaps just on water and versus Goths). I think they should keep the jack of all trades aspects, but add a bit on a particular strength.

  • Goths are probably a lot better since the last update. I think the developpers should give them a long time without update to really evaluate how they perform now.

  • Indians are probably around the right place, but their unique unit is terrible. It should be reworked.

  • Italians are a bit underwhelming, except on water of course.

  • Khmer got an economic buff and that is really fortunate, but now I think they should be even more pushed to use elephants.

  • Koreans are certainly better with the -15% wood cost on all units, but they could use a small buff still.

  • Lithuanians are in my opinion the worst civilisation in the game in terms of game logic. They are not a very special civilisation, but rather quite unimaginative. I propose to reorder their bonuses a bit.

  • Portuguese need a little early bonus.

  • Saracens should be pushed towards using camels.

  • Turks need something, and I suppose nobody knows what for years now, as lacking pikemen and elite skirmisher is a problem in the mid game and in trash wars. I would argue to keep their tech tree as it is but to buff them in some other way.

  • Vietnamese definitely got an appropriate eco bonus (wood saved) and isn’t too far from being balanced. I think their Rattan archers and elephants could be helped a bit.

  • Knights and Paladins have been given bonuses too generously since DE came out, to new civilisations and to Teutons (and even before Malians with Farimba).

  • As a remark on knights, Franks used to have iconic paladins, and before DE came out they were still the best in the game for a long time… but not by a very large margin, as anyone would have considered giving them just +5% more HP (to 200) overpowered. Meanwhile, a lot of people were considering them to be quite monochromatic: either knigts would work or nothing would. In DE, with the great boom of Cumans with faster paladins, the new armour of Teutons and of course the Lithuanians with more attack from Relics, and now the Bulgarians with faster attacking knights from Stirrups, the Frank knight rush is definitely not anymore the best in the game (which was already discussible, Berbers being probably better), and their paladins neither. And historically, the Franks and maybe the Teutons should have the best knights/paladins. Now, I don’t think their paladins should be buff, but rather all the other be nerved. The developpers tend to prefer balancing the game through buffs than nerves (globally speaking), and that creates a problem of perpetual inflation: everyone has to continue getting more bonus to compensate. And I am all for civilisations which feel really special, but to achieve a better balance, some will just have to be nerved.

Now, let’s move to the details (the parentheses are just very unsure ideas, and sometimes the points I make stack, sometimes they don’t):
Using a bit more scorpions, swordsmen, camels should be encouraged. The nerf to tower rush in DE (less HP in FA) is interesting, but this could go further. Elephants should be weak versus pikes, but they are just too ridiculously weak, and can not run away like all the other cavalry units.

  • Team bonuses apply dynamically, depending on the current alliances.
  • Heavy scorpions +1 pierce armour (up to 8).
  • Heavy scorpions minimum range -1 (to 1).
  • Camels -5 gold, +5 food (for 60f, 55g total).
  • Camels +3 against elephants, heavy camels +5, imperial camels +8 (for a total of +12/+23/+26).
  • Pikemen -3 bonus vs elephants, halberdiers -5 (for a total, including cavalry bonus damage, of +30/+44/+55 for spearman/pikeman/halberdier).
  • Eagle warriors cost +5 food (for 25f, 50g total).
  • One more pile of starting gold for each player (800g).
  • Make Long swordsman upgrade -40f (160f, 65g).
  • Atonement -150 gold (for 175 g total, which is still a lot for technology not often used).
  • Dry dock -150 food, -100 gold (to 450f, 300g).
  • Town patrol -100 food (to 200f, 100g).
  • Elite battle elephants attack was nerved by 2 (16 to 14) in DE. To me this change is unexplicable: the elite bate elephant is far from overpowered, they are very easily and effectively countered by pikes, and the civilisations with battle elephants are averagely quite weak. To me this change must absolutely be canceled, as 16 is the right amount of attack for this unit.
  • Steppe lancers: reduce cost by -5 gold (to 70f, 40g).
  • Supplies technology also affects swordsman-like units : - 10 food for Beserk, Woad Raider, Teutonic Knight, Jaguar Warrior, Shotel Warrior, Throwing Axeman, Samurai, Kamayuk, Condottiero and Gbeto. - 5 food for Karambit Warrior. I don’t think anyone is going to argue one of these UU was the best, nor that food is really the limiting factor (at least by the small change margin I propose to give).
  • New ability to have fishermen to drop off resources at the dock: would be great if it was not abusible for all kind of food. That might not make a huge difference though, as that requires some micro.
  • (Building a Blacksmith is mandatory to have access to towers. This is a possible way to nerf power rush even more.)



  • Maghrabi Camels is too expansive compared to its effect: -200 food (to 500, 300g).


  • Warwolf: also gives a +40 attack bonus vs ships and siege weapons.
  • DE cost change: not sure to understand why. Their Yeoman technology is already quite expansive. A balance between these two techs seems necessary, like e.g. Yeomen 500w, 300g and Warwolf 600w, 400g.


  • Were probably in an alright spot before last update (36906). Paladin possible but not necessary to me. Stirrups knights and cavaliers are just crazy, so I thinks this effect should absolutely be canceled. Moreover, they are stongly encouraged to use their Konniks as these are a bit cheaper and can be produced from a Krepost.
  • They have all powerful units other than archer and hand cannoneers: take one of the siege units away (heavy scorpion or siege onager), or just keep the paladin removal.
  • Perhaps add Slavs “Free supplies” bonus.
  • Perhaps make konnik base attack 10% faster so that they are serviceable before stirrups.
  • The stone bonus on forums is nice, but it could be pushed to -75 stone without shocking me.


  • Take away parthian tactics. Why hand them parthian tactics when they have terrible cavalry archers and it does not benefit to the arambai? OR Let Parthian Tactics affect the Arambai, and then reduce the base pierce armour of the Elite Arambai to 1.
  • Alternatively, in order to make pikes less dangerous towards cavalry, or simply to have a solution against them, give elite arambais +2 attack bonus vs pikes and +1 melee armour. This would also justify their high upgade cost.
  • Give back the Elite Arambai their +2 cavalry archer armour.
  • Manipuri cavalry effect +1 (for a total +4/+4 against buildings), in order to keep a bit more efficiency despite the building armour and HP technologies.
  • Howdah -150 food (to 250f, 300w).


  • All buildings get +2 LoS and +1/+1 armour.
  • They are in a weird situation now, where they are not underpowered, but they don’t really feel special anymore, except for the cataphract. For historical reasons their access to powerful units that they would probably want to avoid in the late game (paladin, elite camel, hussar in particular) given the other options feels weird. I don’t have a definite opinion on that, but a small redesign would not be crazy. They are jack-of-all-trades for sure, but in almost every situaton there is another civilisation wich could be just as flexible which would do things better than them. They also lack a start bonus (hence small proposition above).
  • I strongly wonder if they should not receive some kind of small buff, either to help them get their powerful cataphracts on field a bit easier, reducing the cost of Logistica or Elite cataphract; or simply giving them bloodlines.


  • Rocketery: also gives +1 scorpion range.
  • (A possible small nerf could be to loose the 10 population Town Centre. It would mean their starting vilagers would have to huild at least one house so that they could train vilagers after getting loom.)


  • I think the civilisation is in a better place now, balance-wise. Still far from perfect.
  • However, they should not have paladins: Cumans were nomads who didn’t use much heavy cavalry. Moreover, the civilisation would still be very strong without them, and have lots of very powerful options early on and in the late game (they have very good trash, good siege).
  • I think to help their Kipchaks, cavalry archers and galleons, they should receive bracer. However, I would take away from them the last infantry and cavalry armour. Or loose squires. But I think two out of the three.
  • They could also get a new bonus making their Steppe lancers 10/20% cheaper in Castle/Imperial Age. (They could also get the same bonus for camels, but I don’t see the point as these are weak anyway.)
  • Their late game economy is incredible, at least in terms of upgrades. They should probably loose one of the final economy techs (it cold just be gold shaft mining or guilds).
  • Kipchaks basically take 5s more to train, but are included in the effet of Steppe Husbandry.


  • Boost the age up bonus to either +150 food, +150 gold OR +100 food, +100 wood and +100 gold.
  • Royal heirs: cost reduced -150 gold (to 300f, 150g).
  • Team bonus: add the possibility to garrison 5 units in outposts giving them arrows with one attack, and also erases the stone cost.


  • Bearded axe: also adds a +1 attack bonus vs pikes. In its current state it is quite useless for its price.
  • Foragers bonus reduced to +15%.
  • Cavalry HP bonus does not apply to cavalry archers anymore. Franks did not use them, and they are quite terrible anyway.
  • Team bonus extended to camels.


  • Get loom from start: this is a pretty important bonus and feels to fit their play style (hunting and Drush).
  • Modify the population bonus from +10 limit population in Imperial Age (IA) to +10%.
  • (Little eco boost: the hunters work as Khmer farmers, they don’t need to drop off food anywhere, and it is collected continuously. This kind of bonus should not be generalised though, but it compliments the Goth small hunting bonus. We should wait to see the effect of free loom before adding that though.)


  • Atheism has the additional effect of doubling the price of faith and heresy technologies for all enemy or neutral civilisations, or even all monastery technologies. This is not overpowered on 1 vs 1 as Huns have very bad monks, and this would only come in the Imperial Age. Also, rename this technology “Tengrism”.
  • Take Marauders away for a new unique tech (if someone has non-overpowered idea!). OR Simply add the bonus “Tarkans cost -10 gold” in Marauders.
  • (What would you think of taking Paladin out of the tech tree? For balance I am unsure they need it, and for history they definitely don’t. Just asking here.)


  • Andean sling cost -150 gold, and food cost changed to wood (to 200 w, 150 g).
  • (Addition to the team bonus: farms are sized 2x2 instead of 3x3, and have +50% HP. OR Change it completely to “regional units” train 20% faster (eagle warriors, battle elephants, steppe lancers, camel riders and genitours).)


  • Elephant archers: cost +10 food, -10 gold (110f, 70g) OR just the gold decrease (100f, 70g).
  • Elephant archers: +2 attack bonus vs pikes, +2/+4 vs eagle warriors and +2/+4 vs all elephants.
  • Elite elephant archer RoF -25% (to fire as fast as an arbalester).
  • Elite elephant archer upgrade -100 food, -100 gold (to 900 f, 700 g).
  • Imperial camels: +1 melee armour, +8 bonus damage vs all elephants.
  • Loose halberdier. They have very good trash other than that, and they have the Imperial Camel.
  • Team bonus: extend to battle elephants and eagle warriors (but for only +2 vs buildings for them).
  • (Appoint battle elephants.)
  • (Villager discount back to original (-5/10/15/20 %).)


  • Condottieri: +1 attack (for 10 total).
  • Monk -20 gold (for 80 g)
  • Monasteries, universities -50% cost, +20% HP. Masonery, architecture, ballistics cost -50%. The Italians could use a buff, and this would nicely compliment the Italian religious history and the Renaissance.
  • Give siege onager OR heavy scorpion.
  • (Perhaps make condottieri available from Castle Age.)


  • Extend team bonus to all war ships.


  • Battle elephants move 20% faster (instead of 15%).
  • Access to Hussars: does not make a lot of historical sense. I argue if they needed better military, their elephants should be further buffed. Moreover, their new farming bonus more than makes up for that. Take hussars away.
  • Ballista elephants +1 attack (for 9 and 10 (elite)), and +2 additional attack bonus vs buildings, and +2 against all kind of siege weapons.
  • Elite ballista elephants +40 HP (to 330).
  • Elite ballista elephants +1 range (up to 6).
  • Elite ballista elephants +0.1 blast radius (to 0.2).
  • Ballista elephants speed increased to 0.85 (same as battle elephants), and benefit from the bonus for faster elephants.
  • “Normalised” archery range: get access to thumb ring, but parthian tactics or arbalester (or both) is removed.
  • (Give access to guilds.)


  • Shinckichon +2 onager range (which would justify how expansive this technology is). OR Shinckichon also halves the damages ally onagers inflict.
  • Koreans now have a strong naval bonus with cheaper navy. However Panokseon feels a bit weird and expansive. So perhaps this technology effect should be free, and it should be replaced by their current Tower range bonus (which could then be a flat +2 range once technology researched) and their old fortification bonus, but boosted with the inclusion of “fortifications build 50% faster”. And this new tech could cost 300 wood, 150 stone.
  • (If they were to need yet another bonus now to help them defending in the early game, we could try this: When reaching Feudal Age, all palissade walls and gates get replaced by stone walls/gates.)
  • (Houses, camps +50% HP. To make them a bit harder to raid in the early game.)
  • (Free arrowslits.)
  • (Free fortified walls.)


  • They are by far the most ill-designed civilisation in The Last Khans. Being monk, trash and heavy cavalry focused is not a bad idea, but it is just wrongly executed.
  • Take heresy out of the tech tree. That would provide a way to counter their powerful heavy cavalry. And historically I understand the good monasteries are a tribute to paganism, but then it would “make sense” that they could be converted. Perhaps to offset that, offer free Faith (which is really expansive), which would compliment the long time it took to convert Lithuanians to Christianity.
  • Hill Forts is coming necessarily too late: the only units it could help countering is crossbows and manganels, but the player must have a castle anyway… So it should be replaced, and the bonus should be free: +1 range of Town Centre per Age, starting in Feudal (for +1/+2/+3). That way, Town Centres could protect the town more effectively from Feudal Age and be safe from Mangonels.
  • It should be replaced by the relic bonus, as CA unique tech. The tech should be 250 food, 150 gold. It could have the additional effect to make one relic appear near the Castle, or one monk holding it.
  • Relic bonus capped at +3 (14+7 is already 21…).
  • The new Leitis cost (70f, 50g) is ridiculously overpowering the unit. Either it has to be nerved (-30 HP to 70/100, or -20 HP, -1 pierce armour) or the cost has to be increased back. I would rather have a unit that differentiate from paladins.
  • The new Tower Shield cost and effect are definitely going in the right direction. I think the tech should keep its cost but change the effect to “Skirmishers and pikemen attack 15% faster, and get +1/+1 armour”.
  • In order to make the cavalry a bit less dominant, and to be more specialised in being “powerful in attack, less in defense”, and give a chance to other paladin civilisations: loose last cavalry armour tech, but earn last infantry armour tech. Possibly loose squires. This way the fully upgraded halberdier would be walking a normal (squires) speed, attack 15% faster, and have an armour +4/+5, which is better than now. The FU skirmisher would also be a bit better than now, but the FU paladin with 3 relics would be a bit less dominant. On 1 vs 1 againt a Frank paladin, the Lithuanian paladin would win with 3 relics, but loose with 1 and with 2 the Lithuanian should barely win. But the Frank one should be a bit better against arrow firer.
  • Team bonus: useless in the state being. Either push it to +35% faster monasteries, or to “relics generate also food”.
  • (If one day the Byzantines were to be rebalanced to be appointed new bonuses for tronger units, their cheaper tras units bonus could be given to the Lithuanians, instead of faster walking.)


  • Farimba +200f, +150g (for 850f, 550g total). OR Farimba only increases cavalry attack by +4 (total bonus of attack capped to +6).


  • Not only do villagers kill wolves in one hit, but also do wolves then provide a 100 huntable food, which can be collected by a single villager.
  • If a military unit kills a huntable (deer, boar, or in this case wolf), the animal rots as if a villager killed it. In other words, food can still be collected from it.
  • Extend the team bonus to all kinds of archers (UU, skirmishers, cavalry archers and hand canoneers).
  • (An idea for a small boost: whenever they research the light cavalry upgrade, all their scouts are transformed into Magyar hussars. That would work just once though.)
  • (Another small boost idea: All stable units cost -15% food. Then knights would be 51 food instead of 60.)


  • Team bonus: extend to eagle scout (from Feudal Age, and just +1 LoS).


  • Kamandaran Castle Age tech: no one will miss Boiling Oil (which could be included in the Teutons IA unique tech crenellation?); very interesting. Perhaps increase the cost of crossbowmen to 70 wood?
  • Take squires out of tech tree (their trash units are just too good, and they get FU camels).


  • Archers walk 10% faster.
  • New bonus in the early game: push the gold bonus to -20% in DA and FA, and -15% CA and IA, OR just -20% in general. OR Include technologies (and buildings? I think not) in the -15% bonus. All these options would in particular allow the three militia Drush without collecting any gold.
  • (Add to the team bonus: trade units +50% HP, +2/+2 armour.)


  • Camel riders : +10% HP OR +3 attack versus cavalry OR walk 10% faster.
  • Camels available at stables in Feudal Age (but with -20 HP, which they would automatically get when reaching CA). This would open new FA camel rush strategies.
  • Caravan free, or all market technologies half-priced. OR Trade units move 10% faster.
  • Zealotry - 250g (for 750f, 550g) OR Zealotry effect +40 HP.
  • Mameluke +3 bonus damage vs elephants, elite +5.
  • Make the transport ship bonus +10 carry capacity instead of +5.


  • Boyars are slower, with more pierce armour: I mean why not, but having a heavy cavalry sensible to ranged units was better than making it basically only counterable by pikes and monks. It is very expansive though, so I suppose it is quite normal.
  • (Take faith away from the tech tree.)
  • (Take free supplies away and appoint it to the Bulgarians. Perhaps replace it by free squires.)


  • Take halberdier out of tech tree, and go with the “garbage infantry” idea all the way.
  • Silk armour becomes +1/+1 armour, and costs the same.
  • Possibly, silk armour also affects camels (including flaming camels). The only issue with that is that it is redundant with the Indian bonus.
  • I like a lot how the Keshik was redsigned to become a “medium cavalry” unit, particularly stong versus archers (a bit like Tarkans). They might however be a it OP, but this could just be the Tatar very powerful Unique Unit making it up for them lacking halberdier. I would still say increase price by +5 food and +5 gold. But appoint +1/+2 bonus (-/Elite) versus all archers.
  • In the state being, the team bonus is a bit useless. Extend it to +2 LoS for cavalry archers, steppe lancers, camels.


  • Teutonic knights walk faster: why not, but this takes a bit away their uniqueness. After squires they are almost as fast as non-squires swordsmen. And Teutons are slow any way, and the Teutonic Knight is good to be the unit which will very slowly push the front line.
  • More armour (+1 per age from Castle) for barracks and stable units: This is a lot too much to me… +1 from Castle Age for infantry was fine. +1 for both infantry and cavalry or +1/+2 for infantry could be all right, but in its current state it create OP Paladins, where the rest of the civilisation is already really powerful. I know Teutons don’t shine on open maps, but it’s okay for such a defensive civilisation. They probably didn’t need a buff to start with, so after previous patch (35584) they were probably doing already well.
  • (Crenellation also includes the former effect of Persian “boiling oil”.)


  • Sipahi is not accessible fast enough: make it 50% faster to research, -150 food (to 200f, 150g).
  • All gold mines are worth 1,000 gold. This is on the same level as the Mayan bonus, but just for gold. Perhaps in this case the mining bonus should be slightly reduced (to +15%).
  • +1 pierce armour/age from Castle Age on either just light cavalry or all cavalry units (including camels, excluding cavalry archers). That would provide a total 5/8 pierce armour in Post-Castle/Post-Imperial Age for light cavalry. This is a way to address both Castle Age and very late game isue: they lack pikemen and elite skirmishers. More pierce armour on cavalry, especially their very good light cavalry line means it is easier for them to counter archers of all kind, thus kind of making up for lacking elite skirmishers. Moreover, more pierce armour on camels would make these more resistant to archers, and therefore provide a very good cavalry-killing unit. It could arguably be overpowered, but I think it should be tried.
  • (Another possibility to help them with gold/economy would be offer them 0% tax at the market on either wood or food. I would argue for wood.)
  • (Artillery also increases bombard cannon attack vs buildings by 20%.)
  • (Each forum OR castle OR just starting forum generates gold at a relic rate.)


  • Small push for the rattan archer (-10 wood e.g. to 40 w 45 g), which would be fair compared to the Cho Ko Nu.
  • There is no reason for the cavalry archers to get the more HP bonus: make it just apply to foot archers (skirmishers included). Then nerf the rattan archers HP accordingly (e.g. to 35/40?).
  • Add free ballistics.
  • Increase the Chatras effect from an additional +20 HP, for a total +70 HP.
  • Giving them husbandry is the same kind of mistake as giving Hussar to Khmer: their slow Battle elephant should get better, but not more generic. Now that they have a good eco bonus, take husbandry away again.
  • (Archers, skirmishers +2 attack bonus vs villagers. (Depending on how powerful new Vietnamese are.))


  • Beserk (non-elite only): +1 melee armour.
  • Beserk, elite Beserk : +1 attack bonus vs buildings and eagle warriors (for +3/+4 vs each) and +1 vs cavalry.
  • Beserkergang: regeneration also applies to villagers OR to longboats OR reduced cost (to 650f, 300g).
  • Longboats/elite: +2/+3 attack vs turtle ships (to offset the lack of fire ships).
  • (Allow longboats to carry 5 units.)


  • Leave the top five spots on the interface for unit creation, and instead of having gathering point on the top, put it in the middle (instead of the siege tower, or the genitour for instance).
  • Before asking a villager to build a ranged building (tower, castle, etc.), display a circle around the possible location showing the range of the building (when building is selected but not clicked).
  • Ability to order villagers to behave as military units (to test, possibly OP).
  • Possibility to assign monks to a default attitude (heal or convert; to test, possibly OP).
  • I find it tiring to always see the AoE II: DE logo when the game is loading… It would be nice to have for instance a work of art of a civilisation.

Future of the game:
So I don’t know if we will have new DLCs one day, but I am saying, just in case.

  • Possibility to officially play on Linux (I know Microsoft will never do that, but I would really want that though).
  • A few new civs ideas: Dutch, Iroquois, Hurons, Songhai, Congo, Siam. Perhaps divide Slavs into western (Polish) and eastern (Ukrainian and Russian). Very possibly, they won’t do new civilisations, and perhaps they shouldn’t given how difficult it can be to balance all of them, and to find original ideas.
  • Add some of the best campaigns from the Steam workshop (from HD) and proposed as mods (in DE) into the official game.
  • All old campaigns (El Dorado, but also all completely redesigned The Forgotten campaings) should be included. They could just be copy and paste of the old versions, and be in a “classic” mode in the campaigns. Also it would be nice to see hidden scenarios The Saxon Revolt and Kaesong included.
  • It would also be nice in the long run to have new campaigns (free DLCs? :grin:), so that each civilisation would have their own (looking at you, Lithuanians!).
  • Performance should remain the main concern for the moment, and in particular the scenario editor.

Campaigns and bug:

  • Dos Pilas: The trigger for the diplomatic choice between Tikal and Calakmul is sometimes not working, if not enough enemies get in the right area. This should really be fixed, a lot of people are struggling with that.
  • Kotyan Khan: Perhaps a general issue with Cumans, but I only noticed it in that campaign: sometimes the second FA Town Centre does not show villagers it is supposed to be training. Sometimes it shows villagers starting their training at 40% or whatever.
  • Kotyan Khan: In the scenario 4, the objective the flee to the north-western camp does not show correctly (noone says it, and it appears already completed). This may be because my army already went there before receiving that objective.
  • In the Manzikert campaign, the Saracens when defeated don’t do anything. They are supposed to deliver some gold…
  • In general, the campaign heroes should have more realistic icons, lines, etc. That was one of the great things in AoK, and it is by far the worst thing in DE for me.

General bugs:

  • It happens a lot to see new flames appear randomly, for instance when creating new buildings.
  • When clicking to bring units somewhere, it happens the red arrows are not displayed at all.
  • When creating a scenario with the scenario editor, when using the AI from HD, the names of the players are picked randomly, and don’t show the names chosen.
  • When using cheat codes in custom campaigns (both personal and downloaded), the game crashes.
  • When building a gate, sometimes/often, the villagers can not build it. The player has to cancel the foundations and do it again so that it would work.

Scenario Editor:
I love all the possibilities added in the new editor, it is very customisable! However:

  • Add the possibility to make “for” loops", to copy/paste triggers, and make some new handy triggers.
  • The scenario editor consumes way to much computer ressources, even compared to the rest of the game… It often shuts down my computer, purely out of nowhere!
  • The scenario editor just displays the melee armour of units, and most of the time incorrectly states the range, etc.

(French) Language issues:
So in general the game is being well taken care of, but for languages other than English (in my case French):

  • Several units and techs make no sense in translation. The most well-known is “crossbowman” and “arbalester” now being “fantassin Ă  arc” and “fantassin Ă  arc lourd”. The second was “arbalĂ©trier”, which is far better, and the first one has to be changed to, I mean at least to “fantassin Ă  arbalète”…
  • Another issue like that is the “bloodlines” tech, being translates into “lignes de sang” since 2000, which makes no sense! It should be “Pur-sang”, or “Chevaux de race”, or something like that!
  • In Kotyan Khan scenario 5, the objectives in French say “Battez les Hongrois”: “Defeat Hungary”, instead of “Defend”…
  • In the Dracula campaign (and I guess in Le Loi) the special characters for the latin alphabet don’t work…
  • The objectives of mission 2 of the Soundiata campaign are displayed in English.
  • The voice acting in the campaign is cartoonish and terribly bad. It brakes all the historical experience. In a few campaigns like Kotyan, it is very good, but it mosty is terrible. Also, where are the accents?
  • In multiplier, when a match is found, this is displayed in English instead of “Partie trouvĂ©e”.

To finish this, I know people can sometimes get intense here about ideas of balance: this is just my ideas, and can criticise them of course, but there is no point in getting rude or too intense about that.


i highly doubt this. goths will have a strong dark age and a strong post imp. but beyond that?

plenty of civs have a terrible unique unit, this isn’t an issue.

are you kidding? right now lithuanians are the ONLY cavalry civ who gets pushed towards using their unique unit (a good thing if you ask me, as every other cavalry civ is just “luls knights” and that gets boring). combine that with their super skirms and they got an army that is all but setup to counter the likes of franks, huns, and persians.

they need help period.

1 Like

you can tell this after just a few days? dang. even the pros haven’t had that much time to test it.


To be honest, a good Dark Age is all Goths need, since they are a Rush civ, and need to be able to cause damage.

Most people forget this, and when a UU becomes good (Leitis) some even complain.

My point exactly.

All Ports need is an increase in the Gold discount. 20%-25%, around that.


I can only count like 2 or 3 other UUs, it is an issue.

I’ve never seen a pro play with Leitis period.


Karambit, Teutonic Knight, Jaguar Warrior, Samurai, Boyar, Ratan Archers, Gbeto Warrior, War Elephant, Elephant Archer, Tarkan, Missionary, Turtle Ship, Caravel, Arambai…

Just to name a few UUs you almost never see, or are just useless because a baseline unit does the job better.

Okay maybe terrible is stretching it, but plenty of civs don’t use them.

And yeah. I’ve said it before and I’ll say it again. I’m fine with finally having a cav civ actually use a cav uu. Better then the good old knight spam


No, you were right, many of them are terrible, and you would never train them unless forced to.

Genitour also comes to mind. As does the Korean War cart or we its called

1 Like

Genitour is actually not useless, however, since it is good in Team Games, or if you need a Cavalry (faster and more HP) Skirmisher.

I Like Most of your ideas, however what im completely against is a Default conversion stance for Monks and a Default villager Attack Stance.

A few other Things i wouldn’t do:
I wouldn’t reshuffle the Lithuanian Tech tree Like you do. Huns need to keep paladins. Longboats arent Transport Ships. Berserkergang only affects berserks, but ist cheaper. Korean palisades shouldnt become Stone Walls and Scouts shouldnt become Magyar hussar. Tartar should keep halbs. Saracens rather +15%attavk Speed than 10%hp in camels. And whatever Else i missed.

Also i would reduce genoese Elite genoese Training time by 2/3 seconds.
Also yes logistica and e-cata Upgrade should be cheaper. For incas i rather Go with the 20% creation Speed for regional Units.

Also Team bonusses should dynamicly apply depending in your current alliances Not only If you Start the Game Allied.

Karambits have a niche, Jags and Samurai are good but not very relevant to their civs.
Boyars should be good now, Rattan archers are used and are much better than arbalests, maybe should get a wood discount.
Gbetos are good too and have their place in the civ.
War Elephants are impractical and not very useful for Persians but they’re not useless, they’re powerful.
Tarkans have their antibuilding and anti archer niche, also very useful in Hun wars.
Arambai is a very good UU, I don’t know what you’re talking about here, Burmese have problems with archers, but arambai are still a top tier UU.

What I’m talking about is Elephant archers are just a terrible unit overall especially considering they cost 100f 80g and all that for an archer that has terrible dps, terrible range and mobility with deceptive armor and HP because they get eaten by all kind of trash units. The only comparison for this is teutonic knight and maybe Ballista Elephant. Ballista Elephants takes lot of eco and are very effective vs non-siege land units once massed but now that Khmer don’t get bombard cannons, I think they’re F tier now with siege being a solid answer.


Nah, tower rush has been nerfed a lot by now and Incas are the top tower rush civs now and they obviously will get a blacksmith, no need to nerf it for everyone else

Warwolf: also gives a +40 attack bonus vs ships and siege weapons.

For a unit that has 200 attack? what’d it change? I don’t think trebs should be buffed against rams

I don’t think camels should counter elephants

They have all powerful units other than archer and hand cannoneers: take one of the siege units away (heavy scorpion or siege onager), or just keep the paladin removal.

And then be a dumb melee civ?

However, they should not have paladins: Cumans were nomads who didn’t use much heavy cavalry. Moreover, the civilisation would still be very strong without them, and have lots of very powerful options early on and in the late game (they have very good trash, good siege).
Cumans did use heavy cavalry after moving west, removing Paladin would make them an even worse in imperial, their siege looks good but its not as they’re missing siege engineers, also lack bombard cannons.
I think to help their Kipchaks, cavalry archers and galleons, they should receive bracer

There must be a good reason why they don’t have it, I don’t think the devs just added an archer UU and forgot to add bracer.

Team bonus: add the possibility to garrison 5 units in outposts giving them arrows with one attack, and also erases the stone cost.

Cavalry HP bonus does not apply to cavalry archers anymore. Franks did not use them, and they are quite terrible anyway.

Well if it’s not good then leave it alone

Too much for a team bonus

Little eco boost: the hunters work as Khmer farmers, they don’t need to drop off food anywhere, and it is collected continuously. This kind of bonus should not be generalised though, but it compliments the Goth small hunting bonus.

alongside free loom? sounds broken

What would you think of taking Paladin out of the tech tree? For balance I am unsure they need it, and for history they definitely don’t. Just asking here.

Bad? Takes away their identity of a cavalry civ and pretty sure Paladin represents their use of cataphracts in history

Change it completely to “regional units” train 20% faster (eagle warriors, battle elephants, steppe lancers, camel riders and genitours)

“Oh hi, friend from half a world away, as a friendship gesture from us, you should train the horses and elephants fasters”

Access to Faith: why not? This will not make them powerful though.

They already got faith through a patch, no need to take hussars away, the nerfs were harsh enough already.

Farimba +200f, +150g (for 850f, 550g total). OR Farimba only increases cavalry attack by +4 (total bonus of attack capped to +6).

Why? Malians lack blast furnace, Farimba is in a good spot right now

This was done so they can deal with better camel civs, its a good reason.

why? they were never a camel civ

This is honestly broken for a civ thats pretty good now, the wood discount on the rattan sounds fair enough to me

another gamebreaking idea

1 Like

War Wagons are very good, what are you talking about? Especially with the new wood discount


They are a very good complement to the Halb + Siege Onager push that Koreans mostly go for.

WWs trade well with Cav Archer, Skirms, and can even tank Onager shots.

1 Like

Maybe for the next write up put a little introduction about yourself. Your ELO or your story with the game. Anyways, thats a long text, gg!

This post would be so, so much shorter if the “if it ain’t broken, don’t fix it” philosophy was more widespread…


IKR? this guy wants to make wide sweeping changes for god knows what reason.


All right, so first I am going to say/repeat it: I don’t pretend to know how to perfectly balance the game. I just give some ideas and the interest for me is just as much in the ideas themselves as in the discussion. That being said it would be nice if we could discuss and criticise without mocking.

As far as balance is concerned, I suppose I propose three kinds of changes: the small ones (like the cost of long swordsman) which just make sense to me but would not change the game a lot, the big ones (where there is genuine unbalance, according to me), and those to redesign a bit a civ whose logic, etc. is either boring or doesn’t make sense (to me of course). The major instance of the last category is the Lithuanians.


  • The Goths: I think they needed an early game bonus, and loom fits their identity. It is both economic and military (for the time and gold saved), and even fits the hunting bonus of Goths very well. I had the idea for the hunting bonus of “no need to drop off” before the loom patch. Now it may e overpowered to add it, but I am just mentioning.
  • Lithuanians: Don’t get me wrong, they should absolutely be pushed towards using the Leitis! But in the late game, with 2/3 the gold cost of paladins for higher attack, topped by the relic bonus, they are just going to be crazy. I agree the notion of balance should come from experience, but sometimes it is just to obvious not to see the theory of it. Moreover I am pretty interested in game theory. Of course I could be wrong, but I would bet the developers are changing the unit in the same way the changed the Keshik: first a Boyar-like, and then its own identity. Keshik got decreased attack with decreased cost. I would bet the future of Leitis will be in a very powerful attack unit, but with less armour or HP. And to me it is how it should be.
  • About unique units: I really think all unique units have their utility, otherwise why would you make them? And with the unique unit lies a bit of a civilisation’s appeal. Of course it is not only that… However, even if some of them are very situational, the worse of all is by far the elephant archer (close second is the ballista elephant).
  • About Portuguese I suppose we agree then. A tiny early military bonus couldn’t hurt, although pushing the bonus to 20% would allow for 4 militia in Drush, and would of course help a tiny bit the archers and the water.
  • About default attack stance for villagers, and default conversion for monks, I am unsure whether or not it would break the game. It could, but I really don’t know. I would like to see “experiments”, like for one civ. E.g. having supremacy giving the attack stance possibility for villagers; and if it was overpowered it could be patched out. For monks, you have to remember that monks are fairly expansive, and quite easy to counter.
  • About paladins for Huns and Cumans: I was raising the question. Looking at their numbers of powerful late game units, Cumans could loose it, but perhaps not the Huns.
  • I mean, Beserkergang has to be changed. I wouldn’t mind having it affect villagers or longboats; or its cost being decreased.
  • For Inca team bonus, I liked the idea I saw on another topic of faster building camps too. We should just choose one.
  • Very true:
  • A Warwolf small bonus attack boost would make Britons’ trebuchets effective against rams and enemy trebuchets. I mean, they would win their treb wars already, but that would be even more decisive. You also have to remember that when hitting an unintended target, they only do half the damage, so the bonus attack would come to play there too.
  • About camels and elephants: perhaps camels shouldn’t be a hard counter to elephants, but in the case being it is a bit absurd that the much, much cheaper halberdier absolutely shred into elephants while camels loose (even balancing the gold ressources). They should be a bit better. And I am also thinking of the Turks here, which don’t have pikes, but get heavy camels.
  • About Bracer for Cumans: I mean the developers don’t sell a perfectly balanced game and otherwise there wouldn’t be patches. In the state being, it is what prevents their Elite Kipchaks from being really effective. I would rather have cannon-fodder on the frontline and more powerful units behind. And their cavalry archers without bracer are really underwhelming. Also, galleons.
  • I really don’t think Khmer hussars make any sense, and they have all right trash other than that. Of all cavalry upgrades, hussar might be the most useless (though not useless). I would rather give them something else and take that from them.
  • Tatars: They were a bit of a camel civ historically (one of their UUs is a camel now). There are plenty of ways to deal with camels other than halbs. I admit Tatars don’t have many of them though, but perhaps they should (like get arbalesters?).

Cumans may need the Paladins, as they lack Heavy Camels. However, if their SL bonus is slightly increased, I would definitely support removing paladin from them.

I agree.

All they need, really.

No need. Vikings is already a great civ, and Berzerkergang enforces training their UU.

Camels being a hard counter to all Cavalry, is obviously intentional. As per your own example, Turks would be done a great disservice, if Camels did not counter Elephants.

Cumans are basically a Land civ, you are not supposed to use them in Water maps. Kipchaks absolutely do not need Bracer, and even their Cav Archers train quicker, and are faster. The whole Cumans theme is speed over strength.

Tatars already have a good UU, and 2 free upgrades that greatly aid them in going for Cav Archers. I do not think they need Arbalest at all.

Hussars are considered the best Trash unit, as they are the only one of them that can take an offensive role. Hussars can raid, while Elite Skirms and Halbs cannot.