I don’t see a problem in slightly nerfing them and even then. These stepp lancers would be worse than knights on some way (like less HP) but better on other regards (like speed and range).
1 Like
Well I do because none of them are S tier
HP, armor and attack > speed and range
1 Like
Tell you what.
You guys put together a concept for the changes to the steppe lancer, including changes to those 3 civs to account for rebalancing them, prove that those civs will not be broken one way or another after those changes, and then post your idea.
This is what needs to happen, MatCauthon is right.
I’m not sure if this is the right call (removing Knights), but IMO the Steppe Lancer is worth a deep dive into. I’ll think about it over the day.
I was once a proponent of the -Knight +SL for the civs that get them. I talked about it on reddit a few times. I personally like the idea, however I don’t think it’s easy or safe to act on a change like that. Frankly, it would be too high risk and high investment for the devs to work on it.
That is why I suggested that Steppes be units that are not weak to archers, but instead is good against them, with 1 or 2 more pierce armor (yea I know, big differences between those numbers). If my opponent is going Knights, then I would be at a disadvantage to build Steppes, however if they are building Archers I could interact on that front. Perhaps 1 Pierce and 10-20 more HP. That gives more of a push and pull for the decisions a Steppe player could take. A niche.
Castle Age Steppe Lancers are alright right now.
Elite Seppe Lancers is not that great because of few factors:
- its price (950F 550G)
- small effect (+20hp, +2 attack)
- a strong universally available cheap counter - Halberdiers
If the elite upgrade is not worth it in Imperial Age then the unit doesn’t scale well (despite additional range) so you don’t want to commit to it in Castle Age.
Therefore it makes sense to do one of those things:
- lower the cost of Elite Steppe Upgrade
- improve its effect (possibly add additional +20 HP or +1 pierce armor or additional +1/2 attack to its effect)
These are the same downsides of the Hussar upgrade, except it costs less but also nets you an even worse stat boost; yet people always go for the Hussar upgrade when available.
Well, it’s because it’s a cheaper unit that doesn’t cost gold. It serves a purpose mostly for raiding economy or trading against ranged units.
Additionally Hussar has only 5 HP less than Elite Steppe Lancer.
That said you are much less likely to upgrade to Hussar in early Imperial Age. It’s not like you have a bunch of Light Cavalry that you immediately upgrade after getting into Imperial.
1 Like
Which is my point. the issue with Steppe Lancers, is their unit price, and that they have teh same role as Hussars, except Hussars do it cheaper.
Steppe Lancers don’t have the same purpose that Hussar line has, not at all.
Steppe Lancers have a lot of usage beside raiding.
Thanks to their mobility if you outnumber your enemy you can easily dominate the fight.
It’s much less efficient for enemy ranged units to escape to choke points.
Steppe Lancers destroy walls made out buildings much faster and easier thanks to their range (more units can attack the building at the same time and high attack).
It’s a micro intense unit that gets stronger in groups where Hussar is a positioning/raiding unit that you want to spread out.
I hope now we established that they have different roles.
If you still disagree let me know what’s you nickname so I can check your elo and see what’s your general level.
In my opinion you could lower the gold cost by no more than 5G but it still doesn’t make them any more usable in Imperial Age so I’d definitely advise on improving Elite Seppe Lancers upgrade.
Best Regards,
RediRodion
My ELO is 0, since I do not play Ranked, and play only with friends.
Still, Steppe Lancers and Scouts have the same raiding function, and even though SLs do it better, the fact that they even cost Gold dissuades anyone from even training them past the Castle Age.
I have been playing the game for 20 years now, and know exactly how every unit plays like.
Every civ that has SLs, has Hussars with bonus, so there is no need to train ESLs, as the Hussar performs the same exact function, for only Food, in the lategame.
1 Like
And yet you still insist after me saying all of these things:
Steppe Lancers don’t have the same purpose that Hussar line has, not at all.
Steppe Lancers have a lot of usage beside raiding.
Thanks to their mobility if you outnumber your enemy you can easily dominate the fight.
It’s much less efficient for enemy ranged units to escape to choke points.
Steppe Lancers destroy walls made out buildings much faster and easier thanks to their range (more units can attack the building at the same time and high attack).
It’s a micro intense unit that gets stronger in groups where Hussar is a positioning/raiding unit that you want to spread out.
SL are not supposed to exchange neither Hussar in Imperial nor knights in castle age.
It’s a unit that has its own unique usage, abilities, advantages and disadvantages.
Yet nobody trains them in the Imperial Age, as they cannot compete with the Cavalier in terms of brute force, or the Hussar in terms of cost-effective raiding.
The SL is not a bad unit, nor does it need buffs, it is a Castle Age raider, and is great at it.
1 Like
Didn’t you say here
that you think Steppe Lancer should be cheaper?
No, I am saying that they are too expensive for the Imperial Age.
They are still fine in the Castle Age, but unless you verily made them a Trash unit, or buff the ESL up to the point that it could compete with Paladins and Keshiks, it would still never see usage.
SL is a Castle Age unit, and that is fine.
1 Like
SL are neither Trash unit nor Paladins or Keshiks. They have their unique role.
They are hardly usable in Imperial Age right now as I mentioned here:
That’s what I’m addressing.
Now you answered saying they should be cheaper, which is completely unreasonable considering that you agree that they are a good Castle Age unit already.
I have to agree with JonOli here. The niche carved out for them by the devs isn’t a niche that people care to play with. Hence no relevant niche. There is a reason they get compared to Hussar and Knight-Line units, and that’s simply because why would you intentionally build a unit that has a super tiny playspace, that only works in mass. The playspace of Light-Cav / Hussar and Knight / Cavalier is actually use-able in comparison.
No one is arguing that they don’t do what they are designed to do. What everyone is arguing is that what they are designed to do just doesn’t matter enough in the scope of gameplay. Going for Steppe Lancer’s right now is just more likely to put you in a worse spot than if you had gone heavy Hussars, Knights, or even Camels.
2 Likes
I have not said they should be cheaper, I said that they would have to, in order to compete with Hussars, which is unnecessary.
So you think it’s not a good idea to change one of those 2 things:
I agree with what he said quoted below, sorry for not being more clear with my intentions.
“Yet nobody trains them in the Imperial Age, as they cannot compete with the Cavalier in terms of brute force, or the Hussar in terms of cost-effective raiding.”
I even agree that the SL is not a bad unit… in a vacuum. But the game isn’t played in a vacuum, and that’s why I made this post, and suggested the possible changes. Not every proposed change I have suggested I would want implemented at the same time though. They are just many different value knobs that can be changed to achieve the theoretical same effect.
The selfish answer:
I want a reason to make them that isn’t simply outclassed by other options available to me. And I don’t think that unreasonable. They’re a new unit, they’re historically accurate (ish), and they were frankly over nerfed.
1 Like