The Slavs don’t even have stone shaft mining so this tech being overpriced is kinda irrelevant here. 5 gold over knight shouldn’t be a problem either
1 Like
The feudal tech is also overpriced. Taking ~1500 stone to break even means the return is at most 100% over the course of the entire game for the vast majority of maps.
Youll have a tough time finding a worse use of resources during the mid game.
2 Likes
Wtf? It’s the same price and same effect as the gold mining one…
Boyar is by far stronger than Knight-line. Boyar even destory Teutons Paladin. 50f 80g is justified cost. However, Unique infantry and cavalry units can gain production time buff because massing UUs from castles is very slow indeed.
And theres like 4x the amount of gold on the map as there is stone.
The tech is like buying a tractor for a 2m x 2m garden plot. Its not big enough to justify the investment.
3 Likes
Stone is less avaible and in general not as needed
1 Like
But Boyar’s training time is already fast enough, at 15 seconds, which is, in fact, quicker than Leitis.
im with this, i dont think boyars are necessarily the issue, if anything the elite tech might be over costed a little, but as far as UU goes, i think it fairs pretty well, its the bottleneck of a castle (like most UU) that reduces the odds of seeing them in game
thats still only slightly better than 2 stables worth, even if its quicker than leitis, it doesnt necessarily justify teching into. not saying its bad by a long shot, but if you were to go for cav it just makes more sense to dump stables for a fraction of the cost, including the flexibility, as well as producing more gold efficient cavalry, which slav eco encourages.
my preference would be to keep boyars as ultra heavy cavalry/supplementary unit, and if anything lean into that by improving stats instead of reducing cost, this also increases slav viability n TGs (eg druz improves boyar hp +10)
but a reminder again, that the late game is not where slavs lack winrate…
But how you buff the Boyar’s stats even more when they already have 11/7 armor, which is soemthing that other UUs wish to have 11
Maybe increasing the HP to 140 for elite is acceptable.
1 Like
something like that, or bonus cav armour(better anti counter unit) or damage or LOS (better support unit)
Elite Boyars in fact once had 16 base attack, at least at FE beta.
yeah its funny how things have gone. that was with a better eco (+15% farming) and they were as fast as knights?
and if it was FE, micro/pathing was worse? aka archers were much harder to micro than now?
yes if every minor tech is added for free, then it would be good, but arson and squire for free would kinda overlap again on goth building damage bonus and celts speed bonus. maybe they could have a limited discount on all barracks tech, like 20%, to save some resources from every tech and upgrades
yeah i know boyars got buffed already but that does not mean they cannot be still meh, their strenght atm does not traslate from castle age to imp and could use a little help. chaper upgrade could do as well of course
this is oversalling them. they are slower than knights, which already is a disadvantage, also they are indeed stronger in castle age, plain simple, but in imp? no…they die more easily to halbs and arbalest, cost more gold, are still slower. yes they perform well in melee, but this is supposing they can actually get that perfect situation. you do not face boyars with paladins while you can simply kite them with speed and use halbs and arrows.
imho, +10HP for elitè upgrade, keeping the cost, could be justified, helping a bit against halbs (tanks 1 more hit if math servs me well) and a bit more arrows
Against arbalest maybe at only 50 shots (still a lot) but vs halbs is the same, at 5 hits.
With +10 HP only it would be 55 shots and 6 hits from halbs to die, but at the same time will be enough to allow Boyars kill Heavy camels in 1v1.
my point on halbs was about the lower speed which does not help. i get it’s a small difference, but worth mention
personally think that boyars by design should be the melee specialist variant of the paladin, so make it able to do better in melee against halbs and camels, while still be countered, but at least less heavily, is good. paladin would still be much hardier against arrows and still faster and slightly less gold intensive
Sound like the Cataphract.
I agree, that Boyar leaks a bit in imperial, but it had a simple reason, why I did not propose a Boyar change when I opened this thread:
No matter how Boyars would be buffed, they will stll remain a unique unit and therefore be just available in later castle age. Changes on Boyars will not solve any of Slavs problems as a result. They can’t mitigate the slow and weak start. Besides that, Slavs are very good in late game anyway.
nono, just 10 HP would not make the boyar more resilient to halbs or camels than a cata, or not even in the same league. would just mean 1 more hit. a cata is also resistant to bonus damage at range
I don’t think the boyar should be more resistant to halbs or camels.
That’s what the cataphract is.
Why even buff the boyar anyway?
It got the right buff a few months ago and it’s fine now.
It believe it takes the same amount of hits as a paladin from halberdiers and camels to take down and the boyar can beat paladins.
Sure it’s not good in every situation but when the situation comes up, it’s nice to have.
The boyar is like the teutonic knight.
The teutonic knight has gotten so many buffs over the years and it’s still rarely used.
But the teutonic knight doesn’t need any more buffs though.
It’s a great unit at the right times.
Just because it can’t be used all the time, doesn’t make it weak.
That applies to the boyar and teutonic knight.
What Slavs definitely should not become is a civ with a generic tech tree whose strategy revolves around pumping out overpowered UUs.
3 Likes