Should the Steppe Lancer line be changed entirely?

The tech tree explicitly states Steppe Lancers to be “Light Cavalry” units, so this whole thread is based on this argument. Steppe Lancers are NOT substitutes for Knights.

So what I am saying, for the civs that have Steppe Lancers, the line goes like this:

Scout Cavalry → Steppe Lancer → Elite Steppe Lancer

or Scout Cavalry → Light Cavalry → Steppe Lancer

In either of the cases, Steppe Lancers have the niche of 1 range, and additionally gain attack bonus against monks and siege (new!), extra LoS, conversion resistance.

Going for the first route, as soon as Castle Age is reached, Scout Cavalry are automatically upgraded into Steppe Lancers (like the Serjeants). Steppe Lancers cost 60F 20G and the base attack is reduced by 1 and gain +1p armor (both forms).

Going for the 2nd route, the Hussar is entirely replaced by the Steppe Lancer (Castle Age), which costs 80F and 0G. The Steppe Lancer receives additional 20 HP, +1p armor. So basically it is Hussar in practice, but it has an additional range and attack but attacks slightly slower, is produced significantly faster and uses a different model.

In the current scenario, what is it? A stronger Light Cavalry? A weaker Knight? A variation of Keshik (medium cavalry)? The niche of +1 range isn’t good enough to make them usable. It has less pierce armor than both Light Cavalry and Knight. It has more pierce armor than Camels but it doesn’t have an attack bonus against cavalry like its counterpart - the Kamayuk!

Removing scouts line if playing as these steppe civs? Noooooo. Nooooooooooooooooooo! They are a trash unit and needed when the gold runs out.

Maybe just give the unit some buff? Not this sort of thing. Make them cheaper perhaps? More have HP? More attack? Or something, but not what you’re asking. What you’re asking making these civs F-Grade in trash wars. These civs don’t even have good infantry unit for the most part, so they need good scouts to help them.


Aren’t we having a discussion about the Steppe lancer like every month without there having been any new changes to it or the meta? I don’t think we need thread number 95386 to discuss this again.

I dont like this idea at all. The steppe lancer is intended to be weaker individually and against archers but take advantage of numbers and its stacking to perform outside that. Making it 60 food and 20g makes it way too massable


This is no argument. What about Eagles? They cost even more gold!

30 vs 30, they still lose to Knights, and the stacking doesn’t matter much against archers (on release it was great, but not now)

They aren’t supposed to win vs knights or archers so your points moot. And the point was you’re giving a unit that has a range advantage and a designed lower PA to be weak to archers extra PA

1 Like

Yeah +1, Steppe Lancers are actually really good against

1 Like

Those civs have great trash units. Even without a stable. Due to the blacksmith upgrades and civ tech.

this joke has been run into the ground already. you guys should congratulate yourself.

1 Like

But jokes aside, it would be nice if the unit had some purpose or role (although not the one OP intended, that would change all those civs too much) If it’s not good against any of the main units people ever make, the unit might as well not exist (given that it also isn’t a trash resistant unit like the militia line)

funny, because people use hussars all the time and they aren’t good against most units either.

frankly i’d just make the SL cheaper, the ESL upgrade cheaper, and give them a bonus against villagers.


Yeah let’s compare a trash unit to a unit that costs 45 gold. A unit costing 45 gold should be good at something.

Sounds like a waste of a unit. Still worse for raiding than Hussar, because gold vs no gold.

like i said before - its strengths lie in numbers and stacking. i also did say it should be buffed.

which is better? a 60 food 30 gold unit that can 2 shot villagers or a no gold unit that requires a lot more attacks to kill them?

As others pointed out, they still lose in numbers, so apparently they just aren’t good at anything now.


This one, because it’s a significantly smaller gold investment, which I’d rather use for the actual army.

30 vs 30 isn’t numbers. you have no advantage there. which is why his comparison is terrible. the SL is created much faster then the knight. no reason you should be doing 30 vs 30 tests unless you’re just being dishonest. a knight trains in 30 seconds. so does a scout cavalry. a SL is 24 seconds. in the time i can train 30 knights i can train 37.5 SL. food for thought.

except it also masses up slower, requires more food, and takes more attacks to kill. 30 gold isn’t a lot. if the whole goal is to kill your opponents eco, then SL is doing better.
my proposal would be something like
SL reduced to 22 second training time, 60 food, 30 gold cost. elite upgrade is 400 food and 400 gold.
SL has 8 attack +6 villager bonus, and attack rate of 2.2.
ESL has 11 attack, +8 villager bonus, and attack rate of 2.1

1 Like

Not sure but I don’t usually see much more cavalry at once than that, unless the game has already gone very late. I would prefer to give the Steppe Lancers some specific role, but not sure what because the civs that have access to them tend to be able to counter pretty much everything already. Given how bad Cuman skirms are though, maybe a lowered base damage and attack bonus vs archers and cav archers could be an option to look into. It wouldn’t make Mongols OP because Mangudai are good at cav arch vs cav arch engagements already anyway.

If you have access to Hussar, using any gold to make raids seems like a waste of gold in most normal situations.

Maybe, but the unit still isn’t expendable. So just for throwing the unit into base raids to be picked off by defensive buildings, I prefer the Hussar

Or we can use the Elite Steppe Lancer upgrade to make it a trash unit. Basically all stats of Elite Steppe Lancers are same as Steppe Lancers except cost and attack bonus against villagers (they get the same base attack 9 but gain an additional +2 against villagers to take them out 1 hit sooner).

the point is they DON’T HAVE A BLOODY ADVANTAGE. the STEPPE LANCER IS SUPPOSED TO OVERWHELM OPPONENT WITH NUMBERS. thats why they have a range advantage and can stack.
30 vs 30 isn’t an ADVANTAGE, and considering it trains FASTER then a knight, a 30 vs 30 fight is at best insanely DISHONEST. i mean just look at differences.
30 knights costs 1800 food 2250 gold, and 900 seconds of training time.
30 steppe lancers costs 2100 food (+300), 1350 gold (-900), and 720 seconds of training time (-180).
one side put in a heck of a lot more investment into the fight. and this doesn’t even factor into the situation that Cumans can train them TWICE as fast.

laughs in meso civs.

thats why i see players throwing 75 gold knights into enemy bases just to raid and die. oh wait.

1 Like

Yeah, you can justify losing gold units during mid game, because doing enough eco damage can deprive your enemy from a lot of future eco potential (e.g. being able to delay a tc or castle going up is certainly gold worthy) and +2 knights can actually survive arrow fire for a while from TC, but given that in low numbers knights are better than SL in general, this doesn’t give you any reason to make any SL.

Yeah that isn’t a very reliable strategy to say the least. Hence the unit needs to be found an actual purpose. Sure the SL trains slightly faster, so you might be able to get a few more out, but this at the current state of the unit will hardly tip anything in your favour, and it’s also the worst way to try and counter knights. Not to mention that the unit is completely unviable in team games due to the civ position picking pretty much guaranteeing archer civs.