+5 bonus damage.
Berbers camel archer is already a solid S tier unit. The extra bonus damage isn’t really needed but ir can stay even though I dont think its necessary.
Also I’ll change the edit tomorrow but I just want to make Conquistadors a little more viable than being completely outclassed by one unit.
Saracens
Overrated, even if they can abuse market, that doesn’t make resources magically appear from somewhere. They’re win more civilization meaning they can close out games in situations where you should win anyways.
I do think that archers shouldn’t break buildings by themselves, maybe the arrows could make the building take more damage from melee attacks for certain duration. Obsidian Arrows is the real issue considering Mayans have actual eco bonuses.
Lithuanians
Lith eco is subpar and the monk thingy is high rolly. I don’t like the idea of +4 attack in castle age though. So they definitely need to ladder the bonus to like +3/+4 or +2/+4 in castle/imperial age.
Bulgarians
Bulgarians are already amazing, tanky 2 handed swordsmen, hussars with stirrups, Elite konniks that beat FU Paladins. Even Bracer. One of the only civs that can afford to upgrade their siege fully. I don’t think they need buffs. They do not need stronger ranged units, they have great melee units and good scorpions/CAs/skirms/Kreposts/SOs as backline already
Tatars
Don’t need nerfs other than Keshiks needing to cost a bit more. If there would be a nerf other than that, it would be removing Hussar from them as FU light cav with +1/1 armor should be still better than FU Hussar.
Vikings
Yea Chieftains should be cheaper again. They get all Hoardings, Masonry and Architecture, maybe removing Hoardings or Architecture would be decent so they can’t hold the map as long with their castles.
Byz
Yes, town patrol should be free.
Spanish
They are fine, I don’t feel like Conqs need changes. Conqs falling off in imperial age is normal, its life of high HP ranged units that try to fight mass archers/cav. You would need to micro 3 times more than the enemy to not waste damage considering 90% of them will try to hit the same target otherwise.
Spanish have Paladin and great team bonus for imperial age. I don’t see any reason to change them.
By that logic, Bulgarians should lose hussar as well
Tankier Hussar is better considering it is the melee fodder. Also if you fight purely ranged units, having 7 pierce armor instead of 6 means you will take 25% less damage against FU arbalester. This means you survive 33.33% longer which is better than stirrups.
If you use gold frontline, you will run out of gold eventually in stalled out games.
But yes, Bulgarian Hussar is strong but Bulgarians do have weakness in lacking FU archers, Skirms or CAs to complement it. The best options they can get is heavy scorpions or skirms without last armor upgrade.
While Tatars hussars are the best at being fodder bear in mind Tatars happen to have the absolute worst halbs, those can barely be used as fodder, so the trade off is fair.
Yea its fair that they keep Hussar. They’re not the best civ atm. I feel like people are overreacting. The 2 extra sheep didn’t make their eco that amazing.
Its not only the 2 sheep in feudal. Its the fact that when starting to boom, they get basicially 250 food per TC, which means they can delay placing farms by over two minutes.
None of their bonuses are OP by itself, but its just a combination of very strong bonuses, all stacked on top of each other. I mean, they are even strong on arena. A map without elevation. So you can take away one of their bonuses and they are still just fine.
No to the saracen change, it’s Madrasah that needs rework.