Slavs September buff suggestions

Boyar melee armor increased by +1
Boyar HP increased by +20

Any more suggestions?

" Farmers work 15% faster " or even “20% faster Farmers”.

what about increasing their farm rate to +216542467521674%? seems fair to me


A lot of people complained about how Boyar loses to Teutonic Paladins by roughly 5 HP, so this won’t be that bad buff, still weak to halbs and camel riders, basically slightly improves a strenght without invalidating their weakness


But Slavs have husbandry, better halbs than Teutons, and are a totally different civilization. Why compare both units ?


Teuton Paladins are much better.


Is not comparing is t people feeling upset because Boyar loses to a stable unit.


But it’s not a regular stable unit. It’s a stable unit that only 1 civilization can do and many people find too strong already and should not be used as a baseline. Compare boyars against generic paladins, they win.



I guess that the issue is not that slavs need a buff or that their UU is bad.

The problem is that the teuton pala, except for a negligible speed difference, is better than Boyar in EVERY scenario. Vs archers, infantry, cavalry, the teuton pala performs at least slightly equally, in several cases much better.

Also the cost and the castle producing are a disadvantage.

I think slavs do not need any buff, at all, but the existence of a UU which is completely worse than a regular unit is a bit sad…

Honestly, I would give Boyar the same cost of letis…


Frank palladins, Teuton palladins, both are elite in terms of stable units, but boyar is a castle unit and like the byzantine cataphract, deserves to be the best at what it does, and unlike the cataphract which has great offensive capability in numbers, the boyar is individuallly high in defense and that is its main trait, it deserves to be better than any palladin out there in terms of raw battle prowress.

1 Like

Giving the same cost of the Leitis will make them Broken with that farm bonus.

If Boyars were worse than a SLAVIC paladin then yes I agree it would be poor design choice. But here you’re comparing with a totally different civ that has specific buffs to their stable units to make them fare well in melee. That’s not how the game is designed at all. Teutonic paladins are NOT generic, they are the 2nd best in the game. Teuton paladins even win against Frankish paladins, who specifically are a CAVALRY civ and have no cavalry UU besides their paladin.

Slavs will regularly make boyars because they have no other cavalry and this is a useful unit for them. Buffing Boyar because it is worse than teuton is not a valid argument because teutons do not have anything to do with that, stats show that Slavs civ as a whole is pretty well balanced and doesn’t need this kind of buff.

Tell me this: should an elite aztec barracks fully upgraded champion with garland wars beat a castle made fully upgraded teutonic knight?
Perhaps viking champions would fair better? It certainly beats the socks off of regular barracks units don’t they? Similar situation to the boyar vs the elites of the stable palladins.


Let Orthodoxy also make the own units resist conversion more by 33%, and the own units that have been converted lose 40 HP. (Since the Slavs has no Heresy.)

Fix this useless UT, that’s all.

Too much close to the Teutons team bonus.

1 Like

It’s fine for me. It still has the monk armor.

1 Like

There is and has never been any rule saying that a UU should be superior to generic units of other civilizations. The game has not been designed this way.

Other examples:

  • Mangudai loses against Magyar and Turk cavalry archers
  • Britons longbowmen have no thumb ring, lose to eg. Mayan arbalesters
  • Janissaries deal less damage to infantry than Hand canoneers despite both being designed for this role.

Yet all 3 units are considered balanced. Unique units are not supposed to be the universally better variant. They are just supposed to be an unique variant.


I get this point, but still there is no other case in the game coming to my mind where a UU is worse than another unit from a different civ in all the scenarios.

I cannot say that Samurais are a weaker version of champions in all the scenarios. Despite rarely, Samurais can be better.

I think that there should be a situation where the boyard does better than teuton paladin. However, this creates some balance problems since slavs need no buffs at all…

1 Like

I would say that’s an invalid argument. It’s as if you compared a Burmese champion and said its better than a woad raider, which has tons more utility but you cherry pick raw head to head fighting power. The teut paladin is better in every single way to the boyar.

Mangudai beat opposing civs CA at killing siege. Unbelievably hands down. They are also better at micro(much better frame delay and speed), allowing them to beat more units than the mentioned CA.

Briton longbowmen annihilate onagers (the counter to archers) amongst so many other targets.

Jan’s are immensely better than HC in almost every other aspect.

Now please tell me in what way is a boyar better than a teut paladin? A marginal speed increase? In every single other aspect they lose. Cost, massing, team bonuses (don’t forget frank, hun, persian team bonuses all apply), teut paladins are better vs archers and other melee units (including counter units).


LUL. When Teutons would pay for a UT to get better Paladins than Boyar ok, but they get it for free. And no Jannissaries are not designed against Infantry its the HC… Jannis have more general attack but no inf bonus making it the more general version of both…

Problem is also not only losing to a generic unit but that that generic unit steals the unique selling point and identity point of Boyars which is a lot of melee armour for a prize of being weaker against archers and monks (due to no heresy) but teutonic paladins have conversion resistance and more PA and the slowiness doesnt pay that off.

It all comes together that the teuton bonus is silly in its extent and the boyar having a hard time already that sets people like me up.

And tbf, I think slavs need something, they feel a bit weak after losing 33% of their farming bonus (but that is ok itself, it just shows that the rest is not that strong). But no major change just some cool stuff like Monks being affected by inf armour and replacing orthodoxy with a more viable alternative regarding monks making slavs a cool monk civ we have too few anyhow.


Boyars are slightly faster, the upgrade costs less and is ~3x faster than cavalier+paladin, Boyars are also trained at castle instead of stables which gives a few niche benefits like you can produce them quickly to defend against a single ram. Their uniqueness is also that they belong to a civilization that is different from Teutons.

If you feel like this is not unique enough then that’s fine, but please rename the suggestion to “make Boyars more unique” and not “buff Boyars”. Boyars need no buff.

1 Like