Persians buff theorycrafting

Civ bonuses:

  • 5/10/15/20% faster working TCs and docks, 2x HP
  • Start with +50w (and +50f? might be too dominant on Nomad with the food and the 5%)
  • Completing any technology gives you 1 free farm
    (yes, that includes Loom, DBA, HC, WB, Ballistics, Bloodlines, arguably even aging up)

Team bonus remains as is.

War elephant speed increased to 0.8 for both Elite and non-Elite.

UTs:

Kamandaran: Crossbows and Cavalry Archers have their gold cost replaced by wood. (25w45g → 60w (as is), 40w60g → 80w)

Removed Mahouts.

New Imperial Age UT, Caravanserai (I can’t find a better name, but should not be that, to not be confused with the Hindustani building): Units move and villagers work faster around stables
Actual effect is 10% for both, in a 13x13 area around the core of a stable.

And that’s all there is to it. The only thing I can’t quite put my finger on is whether the imp UT should affect Markets or Stables and what should be the name.

What are your thoughts?

Maybe, could be worth considering I think.

I would go for the extra food if you are concerned about Nomad. They won’t be able to get that early fishing ship like currently, but they get to keep the food bonus. Also, they need the extra food to counteract the idle TC from faster creation.

Strange, and I don’t think it’s needed.

Maybe, I agree it needs a buff, but not sure about this much. Maybe 0.7 something for regular, and 0.8 for elite?

No. Just no. Kamandaran is actually good, don’t make it broken like this, it’s not remotely needed.

We already have the Caravanserai as a building, it should be a tech. Personally I would center a replacement tech around either buffing the CA (So they become a bit better, without the Kamandaran suggestion), or around the Persian Immortals, so maybe a cav buff, because right now, despite having a full stable, they don’t actually have any bonuses for cav.

Well everyone in the pro scene thinks Persians are bad on land maps and this is one way to make an early game eco bonus focused around agriculture, as that’s what Persia was known for, that can also aid their early aggression and the fact they don’t have anything until late feudal right now.

How many War Eles have you seen recently? Especially non Elite? In addition, the Ghulam is as it stands the only UU that gets extra speed on elite. Maybe that’s intended.

Except it’s really not that good because there just are better and more mobile compositions that also trade extremely gold efficiently. It’s a nice way to really bring that “cav” into the “cav civ” idea. And also, it’s a shame to not see Sassanid CA. Never, period.

The devs are clear that they don’t want anything stronger than FU palas, at least by a not-small margin

I thought about it and quite frankly, if they did, they would be too strong. And your cav bonus will be the 3-4-5-6 free farms in feudal, depending on how late it goes.

First I don’t think Persians need a rework. The faster working TC also needs the 50 more food cause otherwise you need 1 more on food in feudal than with other civs to support the production.
If anything the 50 wood could be changed. Also the extra HP on TCs and Docks are really nice on nomad ;).

I think it’s heavily overrated. Kamandaran in imp is bad against basically everything that isn’t monk or spearman. Which is fine in the regard that trashbows are maybe designed to be paired with the eles. But who makes war eles in 1v1s anyways?

IDK, I don’t think that persians are the no1 civ to receive a tweak. Maybe when we finally found a way to make eles more viable in 1v1s…

Isnt their +2 ATK for Knightline vs. Archers a cav Bonus?
Persian Knights need one less Hit vs. Crossbow, E Skirms and CA
Same for Cavalier vs. Arbs, HCA and HC
Compared to non Persians Knights/Cavalier (or non Persians without persian Ally)

Here some ideas. Persians used to have the best economy. But that’s no longer really the case.

Farmers generate a tickle of extra food while working. Like Burgundian Vineyards, but with food instead. Most of the Persians best units are gold and food heavy, so this help at least spam scouts. As for team games, trade carts give 10% wood per trip, allowing you to make trade easier and spam farms. Trade carts 25% cheaper. Caravan is free, so your trade carts move fast right at the start in castle age. This will allow the Persians to bring forth their gold-heavy units more easy.

This could too strong. Or too weak. Not sure.

Elephants could be given a charge bar to make them move faster maybe? Recharges every X seconds, and gives a speed buff of Y for Z seconds before recharging again. Just an idea, and not sure which elephant units it should apply to. War elephants could also possibly get a speed buff when within X tiles of either an enemy unit or their target.

1 Like

Fun Fact: Persians represent the Indian Muslim Empires Dehli Sultanate and Mughal Empire which Hindustanis should represent much better. Cause these Empires used Heavy cav (ridden by Ghilman), Cavalry Archers, Elephants and little gunpowder (at least in aoe2 time frame).

Likewise, Hindustanis represent the medieval East Persian empires of Tajikistan, Uzbekistan, Afghanistan much better than Persians. I mean something like Ghurids. As camels fit a Bactrian civ much better, as well as caravanserais were used there as the silk road passes Afghanistan and also they made use of gunpowder much earlier excessively.

I’m pretty sure Persians represent Sassanian Persia and that area actually, it literally says that in their history section ingame.

They are but also surprisingly well fit the Indian persianate civs. I guess that is why Indians werent added earlier. I never talked about intent just describing the civs identity. Also aok devs didnt exclusively use Persians as sassanids just looking at Khwarizmian Shah in GK4

Just shows how devs still continue to mess with the civ at the civ id number of Indians and marginalize Persians more and more by introducing civs who compete with Persians which leave almost no room of relevance for them. Persians, Tatars, Hindustanis, three directly Persian civs. Even though Tatars are weird and are meant to represent Golden Horde and whatnot without much connection.

do they have heavy cavalry upgrade tho? because trash heavy cav archer even without bracer is quite OP in late game.
As for imp UT, it sounds like a better version of the Unique building from Hindustani, which is…well not unique. I say it should buff their cavalry units instead, like reducing population space by 10% for cav units or return % gold cost when their cav unit get killed or something.

Imo Persians should get the faster tc in dark age back and then the dock bonus should be seperated so that only fishing ships are created faster (or maybe war ships but not fishing ships). This way they get an early game buff for land maps without gaining strenghts on hybrid maps (depending on the dock bonus that might even result in a nerf here).

I really don’t see the need to pack tc and dock in one single bonus. They still can have bonuses for both but with different effects.

The thing I always hated is how bland Persians are.
I mean, they get good cavalry with Paladins + Heavy Camels in team games, but 1v1 they feel just a bad copy of Tatars with worse economy.
Their renomated horse archers are nowhere to be seen, with the addition of Steppe Lancers to the game now their stable is not even that complete imho.
Overall they leave me unimpressed, I’d rather pick Byzantines or Tatars over them 1v1 (similar in some aspects), and in team games any other FU Paladin civ is better at pocket position as it’s more focused or versatile.
Franks, Huns and Burgundians are much better at Paladin spam, Magyars, Teutons and Spanish are much more versatile. Even Cumans might be better with better economy lead and versatility.
I think Kamandaran should affect HCAs too, but I’d rework it to make it change 75% of the gold cost into wood, rather than 100%.
It would be a nerf for trashbows, which are really trash anyways, but at least make those horse archers usable.
Parthian Tactics tech and no Persian HCAs used…what a joke, even Cumans HCAs are more used due to cheaper ranges, faster speed and creation time (when Kipchaks can’t be used for any reason).

2 Likes

We had this one.

You need the +50f to make vill production more reasonable. I remind you that Persians eco bonus is not just a positive one but also a negative one, TC consumes more Food per minute.

Why would you give this civ another eco bonus though? It’s already a horrible boring booming civ. Instead of this one you could just design a new powerspike, you chose to push them further into this boring niche position.

I am all for removing Mahouts! Absolutely agree.

Why though? Why would you bother making Trashbow if you have a TrashCA? Doesn’t make sense to me, besides being too broken. In order to introduce the game with the concept of a TrashCA it must lack:
Bracer + Thumbring + HCA + Armor/PT, just to begin with, on top of other possible conditions such as lacking access to FU Hussars.
You dont realize how strong CA in at this stage of the game where gold is precious.

This change doesnt make sense at every single aspect of it. For real.

The Persian culture is so rich I’m sure we can find a different name.
You put zero thinking into this one, you cant have a building that buffs economy (basically a fragment of Feitoria if placed correctly) if it costs only wood. You just cant. That’s why the original Hindu Caravanserai cost STONE.
You want to prevent abuseness and spammable stuff.

Besides this fundemental mistake - again, you push Persians further into this boom-into-Knights with eco bonuses and predictable Knights/Stable bonuses. Yay.
Single dimensional point of view of this civ, and overall this such a fascinating Empire.

No offense but besides the War Elephant buff it couldn’t been worse. Both in terms of playability / understandment of the mechanism, and conceptually.

We could make the Imperial UT be the old Burmese Imp UT (Cavalry do bonus dmg vs Buildings).

Then there’s even less of a reason to make War Elephants, considering that’s one of the few things they can do, because buildings don’t run away.

Yep, their full stable upgrade is no longer full, even then they are just generic without any significant bonus. I think they should have battle elephants at least, but then battle elephants themselves are pretty trash and need a buff, but that’s another topic.

Yes, Their CA is an absolute joke, how come a civ that invented parthian tactic has worse CA than other civs. It just makes no sense at all.

1 Like

It’s literally has only 2 bonuses lmao.

Better against halbs, and more DPS per wood. Make them lack HCA and Bracer (as they do already) and it’s balanced.

Cope? Folwarks exist. And besides, it’s non stacking anyway, so with good placements and investments it’s basically a Slav bonus but only in imp and costs a lot of food and gold, and then wood.

Yeah, 50. Who cares, it’s for trade, and if you have trade, you can spare 150 gold for 2 buildings costing 50 each.

Go seethe somewhere else. What is your solution to the Persians question?

Aren’t you like 800 elo?

You still get unit that has 9 atk, 6 pa and 70 without spending gold. That’s way too strong for a trash unit that has range and mobility. At the very least you’d need to remove parthian tactics but even then I’m skeptical trash ca hussar would easily be balanced in trash wars.

You do realize that pure trash wars happen at like 1:30 which is in less than 1 in a thousand games, right?

Even then a lot of civs are able to keep a backline damage dealing unit like Arbalests, HCA, Mangudai, War Wagons, Conqs… That is going to be a lot better than trash CA without bracer.