you could say this about conquistadors too, should we buff elite conq? jans are amazing in castle age, which is why they fall off harder in imp.
except making a unit stronger gives a civ more options, which means its a buff. and no, jans and HC don’t overlap that much.
Honestly I dont think an small E Jani buff wouldnt be that bad, but it would be mostly an arena buff I imagine
Jans are amazing at Castle age, I agree but as you also wrote, it is in Castle age, not in Imperial Age. HC and Jans are already overlapping quite a lot if we compare HC and Elite Jans. I am sure many will agree that HC is superior than the castle age jans and you can get many HC instead of spending an upgrade fee to elite jans which doesn’t give you a lot. only +1 extra armor and +1 range with a less accuracy. I am not sure if 8 range with less accuracy is somehow equal to 7 range with a better accuracy in stats…
Elite Conquistador has 70% accuracy so I wouldn’t say no to 75% for them as well. However, here again my point is HC is overlapping or even superior for Turks in Imperial Age. For this reason, I will insist on my decision that elite jans definitely needs some love.
Arena games generally ends before elite jans upgrade with the fast imp. strategy. 
I don’t think a ca’s buff is the way to go and let alone a buff on their late game, issue with turks is their early game where they are really weak.
That is the point, i was thinking in a mid game buff, mainly against cav civs, the lack of pikemen is huge, and camels without blacksmith aren’t a proper replacement, and if you are going full CA the eco suffers too much. If you take a bad fight is more difficult to stop the snowball without pikes and Turks’ CA are just generic until Castle UT
Jans are excellent at castle age. Fine. Knights are also excellent in castle age so let’s make their imp upgrade 3 times more expensive. This is such a ridiculous argument. However I agree that Turks late game needs 0 buff. Turks are good on closed maps and one reason for that thy can survive their weak early game upto the castle age. So if turks need a buff, I think it should be to their early game eco. Not to the points they are already strong.
Except that they were also become solid civ in Arabia. Viper consider Turks mid-tier on Arabia. Hera even put them A-tier when their Hussar buff came out.
You can make basically same argument with Magyars/Tatars, their CA is just generic before UT. The difference is just exist of pike. But honestly, those civs also don’t train much pike/Halbs before imp. Turks CA play is already amazing with cheaper UT than Magyars/Tatars and also combine with +1PA hussar and don’t need buff.
I would argue that Turks are better than Magyars and worse than Tatars simply because the gold bonus is better than what Magyars have but the better eco and free thumb ring of the Tatars is really strong
Turks are worst 8th civ in Arabia according to win rates. Very solid.
Winrates aren’t all to meassure balance
Khmer had 49% winrate yet pros considered them too much for TGs
Cavalry, Camel, CA as well as Kipchak.
Very interesting idea tbh. Not sure how to balance that though.
So? What does this even prove or deny? Of course win rates are the most reliable way of checking balance. Should we go with the feelings of pro players instead of numbers? Turks are worst 3rd civ in team game ranked arabia games by the way.
So then why Tatars were nerfed back in January despite having low winrates?
Balance team are also made of humans, they are not perfect. They buffed Tatars with the prior patch and it made more impact than a single eco bonus should do so they tuned it with a later patch. I think the way sheep bonus initially worked, made them OP for like a 10 minute period which might not be so visible in win rates. However sheep bonus in its final shape still helped Tatars so they have 1% higher win rate than they had earlier.
and attack increased from 17 to 22!!! that’s massive mate
After the recent infantry buffs, It seems players would appreciate more for 27 attack against infantry-line or 28 attack against spearman with Hand Cannoneers. I do not think that 22 attack against cavs or others with Janissary make a real difference due to Elite Jans upgrade cost, janissary production cost and castle requirement
Check my games please … I play mainly with Turcos , Tatars and Cumanos and sometimes Mongols. But mainly Turks with 1600-1650 1v1 RM elo. And allmost every game (besides against Britons) i go for Elite Jannies and they are maybe most destructive units in massed numbers.
besides , i agree that Elite cost should be decreased given in the fact that they allready have gunpowder techs discount which is not working as it is described .Or Elite jannies should have 9 range or +10 HP or +1/+1 Armor.
Or …this one maybe looks little crazy but i think that can be interesting to try out +7 Attack Bonus vs Cavarly different from their HC counterparts.