It was more to make them more interesting. When we have civs like gurjaras and Hindustanis that are interesting to play
Or unique stuff like folwarks and Hussite wagons.
It would’ve been nice if the donjon actually added something interesting to the game. Like allowing it to be another vector of attack, or a more flexible defensive building than just a tower.
Maybe supplies could Reduce the cost of serjeants as well? 10 instead of 15? Considering the recent price decrease it’s no longer as punishing. It also limits the strength of pure donjon rushing but simultaneously allows serjeants to be more accessible.
Maybe something like this:
Donjon -50w
Supplies affects serjeants (-10f)
Serjeants speed from .9 to .95
(And MAYBE+1 attack from castle age onwards.)
I still think it’s healthier to tweak crusade. As in maybe reduce the number of TCs from 5 to 3. But reduce the cost. Less power lag, less power spike. Makes it more usable more often but less oppressive in the right games.
I’m also wondering if hauberk affects LC instead of cavaliers. But is slightly cheaper.
And finally maybe add camels(not heavy)
I know it’s a lot to dissemble. The lack of camels was always disappointing, as it made them Normans and not sicilians. And now the damage reduction is nerfed, camels become more viable. Maybe even reduce the damage to 25% if there’s camels.
Does it? Is 2 the same as 1? Especially when considering PA. To be clear. It’s a 33% damage reduction over silk armour v arbs. That’s a huge difference. Nevermind the change Vs lower damage units. Especially for raiding Vs non bracer civs.
32 Vs 40 hits (Tatar hussar Vs sic LC)
The point being it shouldn’t be on cavaliers that already take less damage AND are harder to convert
The point being I’m trying to diversify the civ out of pure knight spam and simultaneously incentivize different units
Pre hauberk the complaints were fighting archer civs, thus the shift to LC instead of complete removal
silk armor applies to hussars, whereas this civ only gets light cav. is it a bigger overall buff because 1 more PA? yes. but again. this is strictly one unit, whereas SA is 3.
but the problem is that sicilians needed a good answer to archers.
you can do that by making the serjeant more appealing.
yeah I just don’t think hauberk LC is going to put them in a decent spot in imp against archers.
think about it - 35 shot to kill cavalier weren’t enough to help them against archers. why do you think 40 shot to kill LC that do even less damage will be enough?
I misread your previous post, so was just copying from there.
I’m happy with that, but let’s see what the lamentations of anti trushers say when donjons and serjeants are simultaneously made cheaper without any drawback (on top of that extra stone)
Whether it’s OP or not becomes irrelevant. We’ve had multiple cases of balance being changed depending on player experience, that’s why I made the suggestion to lock the discount behind supplies
Because by that stage food becomes less important, and the common counter to arbs literally becomes hussars
It’s the difference between being over bearing (cavalier huskalri) and simply being a counter (huskarl LC)
Remember you’re still buffing the civ earlier, meaning they also shouldnt be at such a deficit as they used to be (pre hauberk)
That is the point of buffing them earlier (making the donjon and serjeant more viable)
And arguably this is done in conjunction with 1st crusade change(which currently is rarely taken, due to the incentive of hauberk over everything else)
What’s stopping the player from just going knights anyway? In the same way that almost literally every civ that can, does. Nevermind there’s an arm length of civs with Knight bonuses already.
Sicilian cavaliers will still be very good, it just encourages more diversity, especially since the tech will actually be cheaper, making it attainable in more cases than hauberk.
not really. this is more of a “gold is running out and i’m having trouble replacing units” thing.
and you now have an answer to them in 33% less bonus damage, mix some pikes in.
except they already got a late game nerf in the bonus damage reduction. why do they need a FURTHER nerf?
remember - the buff to donjons and serjeants is BECAUSE of the existing nerf. not grounds for a FURTHER NERF.
no, the point of buffing them earlier is compensation for the hauberk nerf - to a civ that is sitting sub 50% winrate.
nothing - but by making infantry more appealing you give them more options in the early game, and even in the late game.
that is bgecause coustillier where totally bonkers at release. shorty after burgundiands received the food discount which single handendly made them top tier. so a pretty good compensation if you ask me…
on arambai, yeah, but burmese are not as bad as people tend to think imho and they received buffs few months ago. and the nerf to archer line is an indirect help for them more than many civs considering how hard they suffer from them
Sicilians cavalier were broken i agree, and now they are fine, but it needs to be compensation elsewhere, and donjons and serjeants are the way to go imho since adding new civ bonus is not good since sicilians already have like 5 bonus, while both serjeants and donjons sucks in terms of cost efficiency
but did the compensation come right away? no it did not. point being - it is not unprecidented for a particularly annoying or strong unit to receive a nerf even on a balanced civ, without compensation.
and let’s not lie. this nerf, despite your claims, isn’t even THAT big.
Pikeman will do 4 more bonus damage.
Halbs will do 5 more bonus damage.
o.O literally the only civs worse then burmese are the two new ones.
a very very small buff that isn’t even gonna help much.
and you’ll see i’ve already agreed they should be compensated a couple times over.
but your claim was…
that it was “unprecedented”
which we have just proven is TOTALLY false, TWICE.
did Burgundians get compensation LATER? yes. but in the same patch? No.
Did Burmese get compensation LATER? yes. but are they even a respectable civ at the moment? no.
will Sicilians get compensation down the road? absolutely i believe they should.
yeah i agree on food, merely because it helps them being used in feudal which is their niche as a UU, and makes them more fun to use. perfect cost for me would be 50F/30G, so -15, but i would be happy with -10
of course, Elitè upgrade need to be like 200/300 res cheaper at least. atm is 1900. this is absurdingly high for an infantry considering obuch is like 1400 or so
i agree on the donjons being counted as a feudal building, would make the civ unique, but they still are so damn expensive compared to a regular tower…at least that change would save 100 wood (175 wood from barracks vs 75 wood from donjons) but -25 wood would be a start to make them more sustainable in a donjon rush, which is a fairly unique strategy and would be fun to see in a real game
other options to buff sicilians could be look at their tech tree, like adding thumb ring (probably too big?) or last archer armor (fine i guess) now that they no longer benefit from the full bonus, but making their unique “toys” work (Serjeants and Donjons) is the top priority for me since atm serjeant are only used with first crusade and donjons are basically a liability and not a bonus
just to your knowledge, the nerf applies to infantry and archer as well, cavalier is not the only unit existing in the game, and it’s the sicilians only military bonus and arguably the stronger of their bonuses so yeah, IT IS big.
also yeah, “unprecedented” may have been an exageration to give emphasis to a point, are you happy now?
rather than discussing words and language and bickering, we should argue about a suitable and fast buff for compensation and give DEVS a hand
and everyone widely acknowledges how little impact that the bonus has on those units.
but it is the unit far and away most impacted by this bonus and it’s not even close.
ooh archers might take 1 extra damage from skirms, how often do Sicilians even use their archers?
units that do bonus damage to infantry? so their spears might take 1 more bonus damage. other then that? unless you’re fighting Byzantines it ain’t going to matter.
and i already gave my ideas above. but the fact is that your wording makes you look dishonest and untrustworthy.
the fact is not that impactful means nothing since it still is a nerf, and sicilians 100% use their archer. most sicilians players open archers/skirms in feudal and play archer even in castle…
i have’nt red your suggestions above since i came back to fund 40+ posts and did not had the time to read all in detail sadly atm
oh yes i have used a word to emphasize a point by even specifing “i dare to say” before saying it, and now i am dishonest ok
most may open it, but it isn’t something you stick with long term at all. do they occasionally play archers in castle? yes. but you’re better off transitioning into cavalry in most cases. either way. the impact on those units is small.
when you defend said point REPEATEDLY when it’s pointed out to you that you’re wrong? yes. it does.
you want another example of this nerf to a portion of a civ without the civ being overly problematic? Spanish Conquistadors.
so what? it still is an impact, and you claimed the nerf was not that big, but it is, because wheter it being big or small, it impacts their whole military. and of course the impact is bigger on cavalier, that’s the point of the nerf…the point of the thread is that now that the broken part is addressed, we should focus on give them a good compensation, otherwise sicilians are just washed up teutons
yeah yeah you are right you are the wisest the brightest and the greatest dude on earth now let’s get back on topic
Cavalier can’t kill 2 Halbs in a row any more like Paladin can
Sicilian Light Cav removes only 46.66% HP from a Halb instead of 62.5%
Sicilian Scout was able to win a 1v1 vs a Spearman now the Spearman has 10 HP left after the engagement
Sicilian Light Cav was able to kill a Pikeman now Pikeman has 7 HP left
This change is pretty big since especially when there are more units involved this makes a huge difference. I’m not saying that the nerf is unjustified but I am saying it was a big nerf for sure.
So far from the suggestions I really like reducing the cost of Serjeants by 10-15 ressources or maybe a speed upgrade.
Also you were right about the elite upgrade cost - like wtf?? it is almost Paladin level upgrade cost - the Paladin upgrade is only around 8% more expensive.
Serjeant 1100F 800G
Paladin 1300F 750G
That is definitely broken since for the Knight Line you can first go for the far cheaper Cavalier upgrade and use these for a while but when you want to upgrade to Elite Serjeant that price is far too hefty.
I also think 1400 total res would be far more fitting.
Even the Elite Teutonic Knight upgrade ist only 950F 500G
The expensive cost per Serjeant, the rather expensive Donjon and the very expensive elite upgrade cost are probably what is holding back Serjeant play
Wow, their performance is worse than I’d thought. I play Sicilians sometimes in TG, and at this point it seems like there’s no reason to choose them over the most boring possible paladin civ. Nothing else about their eco or lategame comp makes them a compelling pick. TBH I thought the complaining about pre-nerf Sic Cavaliers was overwrought, as if no other civ had strong but hard-to-unlock Imperial power units. Even before the nerf Sicilian Cavalier was a much worse melee generalist than Paladin.
I actually really like this idea, although it would probably have to be locked behind First Crusade. In games where I create Donjons either aggressively or defensively, the Serjeant creation mechanic isn’t nearly flexible enough to make Donjons useful as production buildings, and it’s annoying to have to build 8 Barracks to have high-volume access to the more useful spear and militia lines. And this would be a way to differentiate Donjons from Great Value™ Yasama Towers.
Anyone worth their salt isnt going to be sending pikes or halbs 1 at a time against cavaliers or paladins. Thats just playing stupif.
So basically your first argument is its a nerf against idiots.
The second and third i agree with. But overall the impact of this nerf hurts most against idiots. Which imo is why they should have nerfed them elsewhere
