For me,was a mistake to give this tech to persians. There’s is no way to balance this in a civ like persians, that gets the most versatile nd conplete cavalry of the game, good siege (w/out siege engineers) gunpowder units, good economy, strong buildings, HCA with parthian tactics, halbs… Yeah, they lack bracer, and the imperial upgrades for milita, but why do you need bracer if you can flood with archers? And why you would use champion, when you have, literally, everything else to play?.
Persians only weakness was archers. Now it’s gone.
If you compare to forced levy, you’ll see that, despite the fact that the later is an imperial age UT, and more expesive (and require a lot of upgrades to be viable), it goes with malays’ theme: malay are a cheap-and-fast low-quality civ. You get earlier through ages, and get cheap elephantos, but really weak ones. Karambit are disposable, but cheap and easy to swarm. Malay lacks a good imperial age unit. They relay on quantity.
Persians, on the other hand have the ultimate tank unit. Just cover it with trashbows and thats it. Of course, you can choose every type of mounted unit to replace the war elephant, but you get the idea. Either you get a really heavy unit to rely on (frank, khmer), either you get cheap and disposable stuff (goths, malay). Having the best of both its just plain broken