You don’t want to go down that rabbithole imagine if we removed knights from every civ which didn’t historically have knights. As long persians have lancer that are similar enough and serve the same role as steppelancer i’m fine with them having it.
Ok, maybe I went too far, but removing a Paladin or reskinning the Knight-line in my opinion will be ideal. I looked closer, and found out that Knight-line for the Persians did exist (with that said, you should be fine). Moving on, I found this unit of value:
So, how will it work? It probably will be another Castle Age UU of the Persians that will be researched at the Castle. In the Imperial Age it will be upgraded to Elite Aswaran. The look of it will be a mix of Cataphract and Leitis (spear or pike). The other option will be to move War Elephants into a Stable, make them less tankier HP wise and make them take down buildings. If this type of War Elephant will yield positive results, we can discontinue the Ram-line (but keep Siege Tower to transport units). To me, this version looks balanced and historically accurate at the same time.
Because we are removing one unit for one civ.
If we will give them SL, it won’t be historically accurate. Reskinning will be historically accurate and therefore won’t be pointless.
A second UU for Persians is welcome. Along with architecture change to Tatarian.
1 Like
Why Tatarian? Persia is in the Middle East, therefore, Middle Eastern architecture.
Because Tatars learnt the Architecture from Persians in the first place. Google and you find those blue lapis lazuli buildings all over Iran
2 Likes
Yes. One unit that they rely on. They really don’t have too much going for them outside of their knights, you can’t just take the final upgrade away and say “oh, it’s just one unit, it’s fine.” It’s not fine.
It doesn’t matter. It genuinely does. not. matter. If it is performing a steppe lancer role, renaming and reskinning it is a waste of time, effort, and unecessarily confusing.
The Central Asian architecture set is literally based on Persia.
3 Likes
So to you historical accuracy doesn’t matter? Ok. I understand from where you coming from. As long as everything is balanced, you don’t care if elephants will be in European stables?
Yet their Castles look similar to our Middle Eastern set:
No, historical accuracy does matter. I just don’t see the point in making changes just for the sake of historical accuracy when there’s a much easier solution, such as just adding Steppe Lancers. And balance changes shouldn’t be made for historical accuracy necessarily. That doesn’t mean the game should be historically inaccurate, just that it shouldn’t necessarily prioritize history over gameplay quality, as it is still a game.
4 Likes
Maybe give them a unique unit like the Winged Hussar that replaces the Cavalier/Paladin but not replaces the Knight.
Similar to the Winged Hussar the new unit would be relatively close to the Paladin in stats. Maybe doubling down on the Anti Archer civilisation bonus they have whit additional bonus damage against archers or more pierce armour in return for a little less base damage or hit points.
Persians were known for their Heavy Cavalry so it makes sense that they are also a Heavy Cavalry civilisation ingame. They invented the Cataphract after all.
I also agree that Elite War Elephants should directly get the speed boos without having to research Mouths.
They are already have the most expensive UU upgrade.
I also like the idea of giving them a Cavalry Archer UT.
Persia was originally intended to be a Cavalry Archer civilisations because the developers though that Cavalry Archer were so strong that they were even viable without Bracers.
But that’s obviously not the case. Giving Bracers to Persians would make their Trashbows too strong.
Maybe give their Cavalry Archers a unique anit cavalry/camel role.
Give them +2 vs Cavalry and +3 vs Camels while adding some Cavalry Armour (They should still take some bonus damage from Heavy Camel Riders though).
This way they could help protect their Paladins from Camels and Halberdiers while the Paladins take on the Skirmishers.
where? The wall colour looks similar to Tatar set.
I don’t think so. Without Bracer CA is just a dead end. Cumans have better bonus than your proposed one. And yet everyone uses only Kipchak. Originally Sandy Peterson wanted them to use CA though. So maybe not totally out of the design scope.
2 Likes
If they get steppe lancers, the unit would need an unique tech, so it would give room to take out the elephant UT
Here:
Perhaps, but giving them Winged Hussar will be a joke. Giving them Aswaran will be perfect.
We can add Bracer.
A unit that is “like” the Winged Hussar as in it replaces one unit in a line of units instead of replacing the whole line.
1 Like
Yes they look Tatar style.
I don’t think so. They already have very good trash options in the late game. Giving Bracer means regular 3 FU trash units + Trashbow with Bracer. If you like CA for Persians too much, damage boost is better. There are some options like
- +3 attack.
- second arrow that deals 1 Pierce damage and 0 melee damage.
- extra attack against a specific armor type.
I don’t think they need a second UU. It’s better to change Mahout and buff their cav archer somehow.
This should work, and +2 range should work as well. Or they can have the team bonus also affect the cav archers
That’s Magyar with 2 less attack. Need to be +3 at least.
1 Like
Yes, and?
Magyars have one of the best Cavalry Archers in the game.
Persia should not be turned into a Cavalry Archer civilisation.
Giving them something that is somewhat equivalent for a fully upgraded one is good enough.
And there is no bonus/UT that is objectively worse than another.
I’ve mixed opinion. I won’t mind either.