New Civ : The Crusaders states

Hi evryone ! It’s my first post here and english is not my mother tongue, so i m sorry for my mistakes ^^

Even if the crusaders states not stayed for long they had an important impact on the oriental and occidental history. Even today the famous templars continue to feed the imaginary through movies and book. That’s why i’d like to see this civ implemented to our favorite age of game :slight_smile:

Crusaders state : Cavalry and monk civ

Bonus :

  • Monastery and “monk” avaible in feudal age. these monks are nerfed, with 5 range to convert. i think 100gold is a quite big investment in feudal age and so i don’t think it’s too op.
  • a relic spawn near the first monastery built.
  • Free heresy
  • +1 attack for cavalry starting feudal

Unic units :

  • the templar. Cavalry/monk unit. Benefit from cavalry and monk tech. As special capacity, the units in the tiles adjacents of templar are healed 1hp every 8 seconds. It’s basically a knight with a zone heal capacity.
    cost : 70food,100 gold. 120hp,12 attack, 0/1 armor
    -elite templar : 150hp,14 attack, 1/2 armor

-pelgrin (im not sure for the translation). A cheap infantry unit with a club and a slowing attack. When he attack, the target movement speed is reduced by 50% during 5 seconds.
cost : 60 food. 50 hp, 4 attack, 0/0 armor.

Unic tech :

  • Call of the holy land : pelgrin are avaible in barracks. The healing zone of templar is doubled.
  • The holy cross : For each relic in monastery, the cost of gold of units is reduced by 5%. Max of 25%.

Team bonus :
In addition to the regular gold generated by relics, 25% of the relics’s gold is generate for the ally. Exemple given : if player 1 has 2 relics, each minutes he earn 60gold, and each of his ally earn 15 gold by minutes.

usual tech :
halebarder is not avaible.
arbalester, gunman, heavy archer cavalry and parthian tactics are not avaible
Husbandry is not avaible
camel is avaible
the +1/2 cavalry armor is not avaible
Siege onager and bombards are not avaible

To make it clear, templar are monk/cavalry units and so benefits of both tehcs. basically it means they benefits from sanctify and fervor tech of the monastry. The elite templar look like : 185hp,19 attack, 3/4 armor

Opinions and advices are of course welcome :3


Paying for a tech that needs relics is lame, and the effect is a worse Portuguese bonus

I dont like the gimmick but ok

This is their only early game bonus if not going monks and its not enough to make the civ viable

Its a massive nerf to enemy monks so Im bot a big fan of it. Also really strong for their knights

Seems okay

Its really useful for getting the relics first, beyond that I dont see much reason to use them. Its a bit unfair for relics tbh

And in general I font really like thebidea of the Crusaders qs a civ. They are an extension of other civs rather than an individual civilization


I have all sorts of issues with this but the biggest is a political, military, or religious organization as a civ in game that has never catered too that


The crusaders states were a bunch of autonomous states. They allied with and against other crusaders states and sultanat. They have their own politics systems and all ^^
They disappear quite quickly, but they were quite important in the middle east politic balance.


It’s more comparable to the poles tech unic. It’s in order to make templar mass more easy, because they don’t have strong economy bonus.

I choose that because crusaders were basically religious fanatic, at least for the manants.
Maybe i can propose to a 5/10/15% more hp for cavalry in feud/castle/imp bonus instead of heresy?

relics are their only eco bonus, plus monks can be deadly in feudal, to heal allies unit or as remplacement for archer. Imagine, you can steal vils instead of just kill them.

It’s true for a lot of civ ^^
Portugese and spain, teutons and franks, sicilians and vikings, huns and mongols…

These have nothing to do with each other. It’s technically Sicilians and Franks, and/or Sicilians and Italians. Anyway, I don’t want crusader states, it just doesn’t feel like they deserve to be in the game, when the entirely of Africa has like 5 civs, and that’s when you include the Middle East.


Sicilians are northmen, and descend from the vikings :slight_smile:

Sicilians are Normans, not Northmen. The Normans were a split off from the Franks, who are best known for invading England. If you play their campaign, you’ll see this.

1 Like

Honestly I dislike heresy as a tech, much better to gain a different monk tech for free or a different bonus, even if it’s faith.

There are 2 enormous degrees of separation between Vikings and Sicilians, to say nothing of the Normans making up a small part of the gene pool of Sicilians (ya know, because people have already been there for thousands of years). Even Medieval Normans came to be more genetically Frankish than Norse pretty early on. There’s a video by Scholagladiatoria (one of the better of the semi-amateur YT History types) - “Were the Normans actually Vikings” that shows that the Norse component of William the Conqueror’s ancestry topped out around ~22%, and was probably lower.

Going for “pilgrim”, perhaps?

If anything, the Northern European components of the Sicilians civ are already well-enough represented. Would like to see them get more Mediterranean stuff (like camels).

1 Like

How are Normandy and Sicily the same? There is France and the Mediterranean Sea between their locations. It confuses me the connection.

Sicily was built by a Norman dynasty which heavily shaped what Southern Italy came to be

Thats the conection


Just play the Hautevilles campaign, you’ll see.

Interesting. Like Magyars but a bit differen and gives even bonus in the lategame.

Also intersting for a cavalry civ. Could be nice.

The question is against which unist you want to make monks in feudal?
Scouts counter monks (though they effectively cost more due to the food cost).
Archers also counter monks.
You could try collect relics in feudal already or whilst going up. But that might

Nah, that kinda defies the concept of relics.

Interesting. Could be kinda useful in knight formations. I like unit designs that are good for additions in already existent armies rather than being just strong on their own.

This won’t work, it’s just too essential for cavalry this tech.

Well for that you need really strong bonusses and eco to work, like with teutons +2 melee armor and the farm bonus.

Your civ needs an eco bonus, otherwise it will be massacred.

I also think this civ is for political reasons not really suitable. Not that I don’t like the idea, but I think it’s kinda hard to explain for our muslim brothers in that region why they don’t get a civ but istead christian medieval invaders…

1 Like

This fits more for a hospitallar unit than a templar.

Might want to rename these they sound too generic.maybe Deus vult for the first one and military orders?

Not exactly. Normands (literally north-men) designed vikings in the beginning. After the siege of Paris, French king give them a part of France, called by the new owners Normandie. Guillaume the conqueror wasn’t technically French but Normand. Sicilians were absolutely not French but north-men, and descendent of the vikings. ^^

For the source : "Si les Normands sont actuellement les habitants de la Normandie, le terme désigne aussi historiquement les ######### ## # # # # # ## Normandie. Autrefois, le mot de Normands était employé pour qualifier les Vikings. Il signifie littéralement « Hommes du Nord ». "

1 Like

I’m agree with you. But I think that when we refer about a country especially in the past history, we refer at the ‘’ dominating elite" ( I m not sure for the translation, I want to say the people in their castle who decide for everybody else) when we speak about the country. For example, after the invasion af Gaul by romans, we refer them as Gallo romans and after great invasions, we refer them as frank. But it still the same people here. Just the kings changed.

Sicilian were maybe not genetically normands, but the elite refer themselves as normands. And, it’s my opinion I m probably wrong, but the strategy and the Warriors were from the elite. So basically, the Sicilian civilisation as an age of empire 2 concept, refer to the Sicilian elite, normands.

Yes thanks :smiley:

I’m totally agree! European are over represented. But I am a French student and have very few historical knowledge, and I don’t feel legitimate with my tiny knowledge to create a civilisation that I don’t know anything about.
During the first crusade the middle east politic was a mess, with Greek, Saracen, turks, oriental latin like Armenians all fighting together. And then the manants herds came and make it more messy. Crusades states was a new culture resulting from the shock between radically different cultures a’d traditions. That’s why I choose them. ^^

1 Like

It’s more to collect relics. Relics are they economic bonus, having monk before other nations allow them to collect early. Also, I guess it’s a really powerful unit to early attack, you can literally steal the enemy villagers, and so improve your economy very early.

Yes but I’m afraid of full up paladins healed by strong cav monks

I think this is ok. Most Cavalry civs have the problem of their power unit costing a lot of gold and also being melee and therefore killed a lot. As long as you don’t implement something that makes them consistantly win the one big end fight against arb + halb spam it should be fine. And healing doesn’t really help in fights, especially not in fights where the opponent units deals such high bonus damage.

The Templar is more useful for smaller raiding parties as they tend to get hit occasionally and then have some time in between the raids where they don’t take damage.

So I think this is fine even with FU Paladin. (You actually also don’t have husbandry btw)