New civ bonus ideas

I have made a relatively small list of new civ bonuses. I want to see if the community would like to see these in the game, or if they don’t like them, and I am open to suggestions for buffing or nerfing any of my ideas. The bonuses are:

  • Blacksmith upgrades cost 50% more and the civ that gets this doesn’t get any of the final ones, but they have double the effects
  • Lumberjacks get +1 carry capacity per lumber camp upgrade
  • Infantry deal 33% more damage to other infantry
  • Archers deal 25% more damage to infantry
  • Camels deal 33% more damage to infantry
  • Hand cannoneers deal 70% more bonus damage (I want HC that deal more damage to infantry than Burgundians, but deal less to other targets)
  • Defensive buildings take 33% less bonus damage from siege weapons
  • Monks take 33% less melee damage and take no bonus damage
  • Lumberjacks generate gold in addition to wood
  • Infantry gain 5% more HP per built and standing castle
  • Steppe lancers available one age earlier
  • Steppe lancers get +1 attack in castle age and +2 in imperial age (for a total of +2)
  • Camels get 30% more bonus damage

EDIT: Everyone, I will update this in 1-2 weeks because everyone has great ideas! Thanks for all the balance change ideas!

This one specially, I like it a lot

1 Like

As much as this sounds great, it might end up a bit too op if this bonus generated the same gold trickle rate as Burgundian Vineyards, the Poles’ stone mining gold generation, or relic generation. There’s usually a lot more wood on a map than, say, stone. And you wouldn’t have to go through the hassle of building farms to activate the trickle, just chop a tree… I think you’d have to halve the trickle at least, in order to make it somewhat decent.

1 Like

I didn’t specify the trickle rate, just that there is one. Your suggestion sounds great though.

The blacksmith one sounds like complete insanity. You basically end up having bodkin and chain barding in feudal age for less than what other civs would pay for the feudal + castle age tech, and in castle age you get better stats than if you had all blacksmith techs as a normal civ. The monk one sounds like it’s made to be better than the Aztec one (a FU light cav would only deal 6 damage a hit), and SL might be not optimal to use but they are still a castle age unit that stomps feudal ones easily. Wood is such a plentiful ressource that you always need, unlike stone, that you can’t just make it give it gold, as the opportunity cost of putting more vills on wood instead of gold is even less than doing the same with stone as Poles + what even is the point of the Portuguese gold savings at this point.

On the flip side, your archer and HC ideas are like complete overkill and are probably not very useful bonuses. The infantry buffed by castle one is kinda weird, 4 castles to be as good as Vikings is a lot. All this stone is a lot to ask for if you want to use barracks units, but if the UU is an infantry unit then it’s still awkward because whenever your enemy destroys a castle not only you will get less production but what you already have will get worse, so that’s a lot of downsides. I’m also not too sure what the camels that get more damage vs infantry are supposed to do? A defensive bonus would make more sense.

The other bonuses are fine and probably only need number tweaking at worst.


With the blacksmith one, I knew people would have this reaction, and the tech tree of the civ could be adjusted to be less OP. I could also double the extra cost, and in the end, you still only get +1 melee armor advantage. Keep in mind that most of these are just things I thought up that could be tweaked in any way to make them balanced.

Add a space after the * for proper list formatting.

1 Like

Ok I fixed that now!

The Blacksmith bonus is insane. It is already very strong in Feudal Age. In Castle Age, your Knights would have the same pierce armor as a FU Cavalier, taking only 1 damage per crossbow bolt. Your Crossbowmen would do almost the same damage as a FU Arbalester and have more range than a Briton Crossbowman. This is an insane power spike. Then in Imperial Age, it tapers off. I call that bad civ design, regardless of the cost of these Blacksmith upgrades.

Also, it is not a good idea to have a Castle Age unit like the Steppe Lancer in the Feudal Age.


Just know that these are not in the game. Adjustments can be made. Bonuses can be rebalanced. I can change the bonuses as much as I want to, or the devs can choose not to add them.

I made a civ with this bonus in my head.

1 Like

So basically the Aztec bonus but situational but also only for Lumberjacks


Limit it to Sword line, Halbs getting +2 attack vs Infantry would be very similar to Aztec/Burmese bonuses

So we talking about +1 attack for Archers and Crossbowmen and +2 attack for Arbalesters against Infantry, you can say that this is very similar to Plumed Archers, so it is acceptable

So basically +2 [+3 for Imperial Camel and Mamelukes]

Identical to Burgundian bonus against infantry. How?

Burgundian bonus of +25% applies to all attacks, so +4p and +3 vs infantry. HC have +10 vs infantry, so +70% means +7 attack. In addition to this, your HC will do another +1 vs rams and another +1 vs Spearline. Not distinct enough.

Too strong. Might need to remove Architecture and maybe Hoardings/Masonry.

Very very situational and somewhat complex. Also the game doesn’t do math exactly, so you have to specify the limit on the number of castles and define techs till that number.

OP. 60 HP unit with 9 attack, whereas Bloodline scouts (which are considered strong) are 65 HP and 5 attack!

Good ideas

I don’t how you will apply % resistance to melee attack, but 100% resistance from anti-monk attacks is beyond OP. How will you stop a smush from such a civ??


Be interesting if they had almost no monk upgrades though.

1 Like

Then why will you make monks?

They are scary and can convert stuff, and don’t die to counters or melee easily.

I think this one should be a UT, like the Burgundian Vineyard. Gold trickle should be a passive bonus when it comes from a source that will dry out relatively fast or be quickly abandoned (stone, berries, sheeps, hunting…) and a UT for something that will last till the end of the game (farming, fishing, cutting trees…)

1 Like

That sounds like a good idea that could actually work!

I like hearing people’s suggestions to change these. I definitely will rebalance these ideas sometime. Thanks!

That sounds like a very good metric for reasoning. I like this more than my idea, or at least combined with it since trees are still so much more prevalent than other forms of this type of generation.

1 Like

Actually, I kinda like that, camels with a small amount of bonus damage vs infantry, even just +3 or something, maaaaybe as much as +5. Possibly as a Castle Age unique tech rather than a bonus. On a total cost base they become about as good or maybe a little less than knights vs most infantry (if this civ has knights at all) while they still die badly to both foot archers and pikemen, and their matchup vs cavalry archers stay a bit of a “this should work, right?” And because we’re messing with bonus damage rather than melee armor they don’t become extra strong vs cavalry units

It would probably be a pretty situational thing, you’d probably still prefer to only add camels if they go knights or cavalry archers (depending on circumstances), but in like a teamgame against a paladin civ, an archer civ and an infantry civ, this could be a pretty cool team member.