My problem with First Crusade and Burgundians Vineyards

So, unlike many other people, my problem with those 2 techs aren’t the new mechanics takes from aoe3, my problem is that those 2 techs have 2 distinct effects that goes in opposite directions.

Let me explain it better by analyzing the 2 UTs in question (I’ll of course consider the most recent beta pup state of the tech, otherwise one of the 2 techs wouldn’t have a secondary effect)

Burgundian Vineyards:

So this tech have the following effects:

  • Exchange half of you food into gold at a 2:1 ratio
  • Your farms now passively generate gold

So as you can see in one hand, you would like to research it as soon as you have a castle, so you can start piling up some free infinite gold as soon as you can. On the other hand, that way you prive yourself of having a way of exchange food at a advantageous rate in the super late game, when gold has run out, and you are flooding with food.

If you wait that much though, you lose on potentially a lot of gold. In my opinion, this isn’t a thing that should simply be pondered. People sooner or later will figure out what of the 2 effects is always more important, and then will always research the UT for an effect and neglect the other.

First Crusade:

So spoiler alert, the 2 effects are:

  • it gives you a max of 35 serjeants
  • it makes you units more resistant to conversion

So again, if you are performing a knight rush, you may want that conversion resistance as soon as you can, but you may not be ready for suddenly having +35pop, or you may not even have 5 TCs, so you kinda waste that free units, and potentially paralyze your eco.

On the other hand, if you wait more you kinda waste the conversion resistance, because the more the game goes on, and less monks can effectively be microed (yeah it may help against SO, but that’s it).

So again, you are put in a position where you kinda waste one of the 2 effects. Now people may say that this is good, and value you planning and decision making, and I can see the argument there, but having UTs with effect that are soo different and that should be used in different moments of the game, I don’t know it just fells wrong to me…

So some solution in my opinion may be:

For First Crusade:

  • Immediately give the conversion resistance.
  • Allows 35 serjeants to be trained at castles and donjon (TCs too maybe) for free like the kipchaks from cumans mercenaries.
    This one was suggested by viper if I’m not mistaken. At the time I didn’t like it onestly, but now I onestly prefer it, so I can grab it as soon as I can without worrying of wasting the units.

For Burgundians Vineyards:

  • Immediately activate gold generation on farms.
  • Enable a new key in the market, a key that cost nothing, and that only when it’s clicked exchange half of your food into gold at 2:1 ratio.

What do you guys think? I would really want to know if those double effects trouble you too, or if it’s just me that is weirded out about it…

Also, please stay on the topic, I don’t want to discuss here other changers about sicilians or burgundians, or other UTs. There are other topics for that.


Even though I tend to defend the two latest civs and their UTs more often than not, I do actually agree with you on this. I wasn’t thrilled for First Crusade to get that conversion resistance added, precisely for the reasons you mentioned.

Having said that, I’m not that bothered by them either. It’s just something that doesn’t feel entirely smooth, but not to the extent that it keeps me from playing the civs.


My main concern is that as soon as people will figure out what of the 2 effect is slightly more convenient, the meta will change so to always abuse that, and never use the UT for the other effect.

I fell like either way it’s a waste for how the game is designed and played, I agree thought that it’s not game changing, but it could also be easily resolved.

Just let the meta determine what is the most optimal way of playing these civs and if something is broken, adjust the tech at that moment. Seems like a good idea to me.

Kind of a weird statement. In balance discussions you look at the full options of a civ and make adjustment according the full tech tree of a civ. Changing UTs is part of the overall balance of a civ. Pretty weird if we are not allowed to discuss the overall balance while discussie a balance change…

1 Like

My problem isn’t really with the balance of those 2 effects, that’s why I wanted to avoid discussing the balance of the civ.

In my opinion, those 2 UTs are balanced, it’s the “how they work that troubles me”. It’s the mechanic itself, of coupling 2 distinct and completely different effects into one techs, 2 effects that also incourage you to research the UTs in 2 different moments.

They had to give a bonus effect to make those takes more than one time effects.
For Burgundian vineyard your concern is going to be taken care of with the planned change. Only having half the food converted will make it easier to take the tech just for the gold gen while also removing those situations where you would have stockpiled tons of food of a huge farming eco and you would end up being able to swing the game with a huge income of gold out of nowhere.

First crusade is 100% dumb and it’s 100% the fault of the spawn mechanic. I don’t get why you would want to have a castle and a unique tech for any type of rush that isn’t about UU anyway. And I don’t get either why you would want to have conversion resistance fast, when blacksmith/stable upgrades are more important.
Rushing first crusade just for the conversion resistance would be worse than trying to rush heresy. So there is no problem on that side.

And it’s normal the added conversion resistance is going to be a niche side effect for a late castle imp/tech, why should a tech that gives you a free army at such a low price also give an always good bonus effect? That would be dumb.

I do not like these two techs as they are and I do not like the two new civs.

Back to your proposals, I would say that both the ideas are definitely better than their current implementation…

1 Like

But if that was the only concern why not changing the UTs all together and just leave the permanent effects?

First crusade has a better effect and it’s cheaper than heresy, so I think it make sense.

I’d say Burgundian Vineyards is actually fine/fun, especially after the patch. At least it’s interesting to play with.

First Crusade I feel is the tech that actually gets less fine/fun with the patch. I’d prefer it if they kept the tech as is (just the one-time effect), though adding conversion resistance to a tech called “First Crusade” does work nice from a thematic point of view (which does count for something in my book).

Basically, I’d say these types of combined techs work best if the one-time effect is minor, and the long-term effect is major (like with post-patch Vineyards). I think having two civs with combined UTs is enough for now though, bring on the next experiment :slight_smile:

We need to have vineyards included as plants units you can harvest from not just a technology.

You mean like… farms?

Maybe like forage bushes. At least in the editor. I was expecting new units and more items with the DLC.

Anyway, I like that vineyards now only convert half the food, as the implications to team games were really game-changing.
With a burg teammate you didn’t had to invest in trading early, because the tech was basically at the same efficiency level as trading, but with less risk and investment. Whilst the opponent had to set up trading the team with burgs could just farm, at some point decide to make burg vineyards and then set up a trading route way later. At least in Theory.

Every tech in the game has the following tradeoff: do I research this tech to get better units/eco or do I just get more units? These techs are no different except an additional tradeoff is introduced: do I prioritize one effect over another effect. This second tradeoff allows these techs’ costs be as low as they are.

I think you’re focused too much on some hypothetical waste rather than looking at the techs from the perspective of a well designed trade off.

For burgundian vineyards:

In Imp it provides a continuum of choices: for every minute you delay you can stockpile some extra food and get several minutes worth of trickle once you click the tech. But this comes at a trade-off because your eco is weaker while stockpiling. So this is actually well designed because it’s flexible but self limiting. The longer you delay the more likely your opponent has gained enough ground to make the tech moot.

What you propose for vineyards is significantly stronger and we’d need to see if their new win rates warrant it. It could easily make them an auto-win if a game gets to post gold.

For first crusade:

The new first crusade will be extremely cost effective. This means you don’t need 5 TCs. Again you get a continuum of choices: build more TCs for a stronger first crusade or build less and get a weaker but s sooner first crusade and sooner faith

In fact you only need 1 TC to make first crusade cost effective. It gets you faith an age earlier and 5 sergeants for 900 resources. Again your propose is less wasteful but it removes the natural tradeoff between timing and power and could easily be OP.

They do a bit, but they’re not nearly as bad as conflicting civ bonuses (e.g. Cuman Siege/TC choice in Feudal)

Or just completely out of place civ bonus, like the Burmese infantry attack. Who ever really utilizes it?

All in all, I like First Crusade as it is, because the insta army it spawns is a really nice (and unique) defensive option in Castle Age, so I would be quite unhappy with the change. The resistance bonus is less often useful than 35 instant units, so that’d be kind of a nerf.

I like this idea a lot. A cool buff. Might be good option if Burgundians will still feel underwhelming after patch, although, I doubt it.

I played a few pup games and the new set up is awesome. You will gain a good lead in feudal and super ahead late castle onward.

Nice proposals. I would like to read similar proposals for the other one-time effect UTs: cuman mercenaries and paper money.

I agree about Siclians and but i really fear the Burgundians upcoming eco bonus and now you will give them another advantage. Burgundians will have 50% food discount on all eco techs, this is really powerful bonus and it maybe will be the strongest eco bonus in the game. This mean you will directly get bow saw upgrade in feudal because it will cost you only 75 for food, horse collar will cost you 37food, so this mean too you will already be like Franks or even better because you can get heayplow for only 60 food cost and so on. They will be a tough civ in every single stage in the game.

1 Like

Not really.

That’s maybe true. It’s comparable to franks but more flexible cause you get either the franks free farming bonus or the extra ressources or you invest more into a better eco. But it’s an investment and could maybe still be punished.
I tested it in the beta and it looked not overpowered. The thing that bothers me is the interaction with the flemish revolution because burgs are more likely to be even with their opponent when they hit imp then.