Steppe Lancers actually need buffing now. And so do the new civs

The new civs are now rather underwhelming and Steppe Lancers are now underpowered rather than overpowered.

If Steppe lancers do get buffed then make sure that the Mongol lancers are the weakest as they’re already a very strong civ.

I’ve attached a poll to see how many agree/disagree on these issues.

  • Yes, all 4 of the new civs are too weak now.
  • Some of the 4 new cifvs are too weak but not all of them.
  • No none of, the 4 new civs are too weak.
  • Steppe lancers are now underpowered and they need buffing.
  • Steppe lancers are not underpowered and they don’t need buffing.
  • If steppe lancers get buffed the mongol steppe lancers should be weaker because Mongols are already a very strong civ
  • If steppe lancers get buffed then there’s actually no need to make sure that mongol steppe lancers are weaker than Cuman or Tartar steppe lancers.

0 voters

The poll is multiple choice so players can vote on all issues.

IMO 3/4 of the new civs were OP in gimicky ways upon DE’s launch (the Tartars have never been OP) but now all three of the strong new civs had their g imicks taken away due to nerfs and now they’re a mixture of very weak/meh civs.

Steppe lancers were OP and also got overnerfed.

And I do think that Mongols are a very strong civ and if Steppe Lancers do get buffed then the Mongol steppe lancers shoud be the weakest of the 3 steppe lancers because Mongols are already strong enough.

I also think that Bulgarians is the best of the new civs and has some very strong points but overall they’re too 1 dimensional to be a good civ overall. And I think the Lithuanians are kind of similar to that but perhaps to less of an extent.

I know that on the one hand the new civs haven’t been played enough for us to realy know how strong they are.

But then again, on the other hand, pros are so quick to figure out the strengths and the new meta to a civ that I’d be surprised if any of the new civs were really that strong as I’m sure at least one pro would have figured them out already.

That’s what I think. What do you think?

Here’s an idea; what if you could build a sort of ‘Steppe Scout’ in the Feudal age? That way rather than doing a scout rush, you could do a steppe scout and have a bigger step(pe) up when you upgrade them in the castle age.

That way they could still be technically inferior to Knights in terms of stats but still be worth building anyway.

The lancer would still need a little buff, maybe +1 damage and -.1 attack rate(faster attack), but at least that way they’d have a purpose for existing.

1 Like

This is a really confusing poll, if you askme.


Tartars sucks. Probably the worst civ right now. Cumans are meh. So, yeah SL could use a nice buff, but mongols should lose thebonus for sl.

Bulgarians are good. Lithuanians are okey. I would give them the last infantry defense.


Lithuanians and Bulgarians seem okay. Cumans feel a bit weak, Tatars are bad.

I feel like the steppe lancer should have been a unique unit. It doesn’t really have a niche


Cumans, Bulgarians and Liths are fine except for a few adjustments (tower shield, kipchak). I don’t have any solid opinion on Tatars. I think giving them free thumb ring is a good buff but it’s a pretty strong powerspike, and the imp UT needs a rework because it’s useless


They would auto-win as soon as they started making SL, just like Cuman.

The part they are 1 dimensional is that if you don’t m@a rush you don’t use your bonus. But since it’s very strong it doesn’t make them bad (it would be like saying that Franks = bad because they are all about cav rush) And then once you reach Castle age you can do a lot of different strats: knights, krepost+konnik, siege…

They have one of the broadest tech tree in the game…

Daut got a lot of milleage out of Bulgarians. Cumans see quite some play, Lithuanian as well. Tatars are left behind, but at least they are nowhere near pre buff Khmer/Viet level.

They are still the civ whose eco bonus can give them a 10 villagers lead, that can spam faster than Goths while having a good military tech tree, and the feudal siege workshop wasn’t touched at all besides bug fixes.

Overall I feel like these civs aren’t top priority

Yeah, 2nd tc in feudal is good, as long you’re not under pressure. I’m not saying they’re bad, but really, one of their bonus sometimes is good, sometimes not, and the other (feudal siege workshops) it’s 99% useless, since it’s really expensive to make it happen.

All in all, I really think tartars are the top priority right now. I would just buff SL, make silk armor affect them, and take away the mongol bonus for them. That would just fix everything

The new civs need some more love

I wouldn’t quite go that far; It’s not like Goths where if you don’t drush you literally waste your Dark Age bonus - Bulgarians can still tech into Longswords in Castle against eagles, or 2H Swordsmen in Imp without any prior preparation, which isn’t bad. Being able to build mini castles is probably my favorite bonus of theirs and it makes it easier to mass their well-rounded UU.

But yeah, the only civ that seems to clearly need some help right now is Tatars, and even then I don’t know that they need a major overhaul.

imo if bulgarians face an archer race that also has eco buffs (say mayans) bulgaria are on a disadvantage… their ecobonus comes through infantry (which are really bad atm with the poor path finding/target priority)

and while their cav can kind of couner pikes/eagles… a mayan archer ball + ant cav will still rek high melee arm infantry and kill their knights on a per res basis. leaving siege, but since bulgarians have no eco bonus outside of indirectly through infantry, technically mayans will beat the siege through economy…

and imperial age bulgarian skirms are taking a big 2 extra damage vs eco boosted mayans (or equavelent) while gaining no eco bonus themselves

leading to a bulgarian player having to be quite a lot better player through virtue of faction imbalance

similaryl to ethiopia vs goths and so forth

aka bulgarians could still do with some work, ultimately all factions should be able to face off against all other factions equally (obviously an incredibly hard job to balance while still maintaining diversity)

and their team bonus is pretty stupid, its easily countered by just buildin a bleeding 2nd blacksmith, a whopping 150 wood… wow, as cactus hinted at, if you dont feudal rush with bulgaria you lose a lot of their “power” thats pretty sucky… even goths still maintain their main bonuses throughout…

I honestly think they should just concede that the Keshik is not a good unit and should be removed. They did get creative but it doesn’t really makes sense to have a unit like this which is similar to other units that you can make much faster from the stable. They should really buff the step lancer and make it the unique unit for the tatars. They should also make their unique tech apply to step lancers as well.

The step lancers should do really well if in a large group but now you have to produce them out of the castle so it’s much more difficult to mass them. I guess you could equate it to mangudai in that sense.

1 Like

Are you kidding? The Keshik is an AMAZING UU. In every way.


Their TCs cost half the stone, thus it’s easier to build multiple TCs to boom, and in Feudal you can build a defensive tower to defend against archers while still being able to lay a second TC as soon as you hit Castle without mining stone. And it synergizes very well with Kreposts. And lastly, the point of the free M@a upgrade is to make it very easy to attack the enemy with them before they get archers.

Technically then Mayan vs Mongols is a civ win as well, since Mongol Skirms are the same as Bulgarian and the Mongol eco bonus is Dark age only. Yes, Bulgarian have no Mangudai, but Konniks are good, they get Paladin and the single best Hussars in the game (while the Mongol one is weaker to arrows). And of course, they still have their good siege workshop. But in the end, the deal is that if we evaluate each civ according to their matchup vs god tier civs, then we will often end up disappointed.

Never thought about that one and it must be like Maya vs Goths, yeah. Fun fact: according to old aoe.stats data Ethiopian and Goths would have almost perfectly opposite victory windows 11 I guess it’s no longer the case…

Imo we are pretty close to that on land maps. However for water maps it’s a lost cause 11 (I mean I don’t think I’m really mistaken if I say Italians get a civ win on water vs like 30 other civs)

Still better than Incas 11 And frankly people don’t bother to build 2 blacksmisths… I find this bonus somewhat funny because in the beta in a 1v1 I randomed into Bulgarian and at some point we each had 1 m@a left and the faster blacksmith gave me the armor upgrade just in time to win instead of losing 11

Yes, it’s true, it makes the civ a one-trick pony for its dark/feudal transition. It doesn’t make them weak however because it allows you to abuse the fact m@a have no counter at that particular point of the game.

1 Like

it wasnt about the skirm vs skirm match up,its that bulgarians have a non existent archer line, so have to rely on skirms or siege to shield them against archer civs(while i understand they can mass CA, most archer civs should be able to hard counter them, due to the lack of armour although they have parthian tactics, no eco and no archer bonuses), mongols have great archers (CA) and great siege

that’s true, i forgot about that, but then is also quite situational if you are already under pressure/implied earlier that bulgarians are not late game best so should rather be rushing/applying pressure as opposed to booming… but i guess it gives them options

but if another aggressive faction catches you while you’re trying to triple TC so early (the food drain for triple TC is tremendous)

because we’re now seeing goths in almost every single team game, these kind of hard coutners are occuring more often… mayans atleast have an eco bonus to assist them early and late game vs goths, as opposed to ethiopia

haha true! still doesnt mean its right, ultimately all these weaker things could be worked on if there was resources (i like pointing out atheism as well)

I said that assuming Shotels die to Huskarls but apparently they actually win, so nvm.

The Steppe Lancer should have its gold cost reduced back to 30. The unit needs to retain its quality of being weak in small numbers and powerful in larger swarms. If it’s at least easier to mass up than Knights, then I think its strengths can be applied more readily.

I actually agree on most things with you. Tatars need something more than just hill bonus (Arena tatars players)

But I still refuse to think that Mongol Steppe Lancer shouldn’t receive HP bonus. They don’t get the last armor upgrade so it kinda pays off on its own.

And YES PLEASE give Lithuanians last Infantry Armor Upgrade

1 Like

There should be a pro tourney that only uses the newest 4 civs. It can be called “Pros and Khans.”


11111111 chapeau for you, my friend