Steppe Lancers: The Forgotten - Giving civs steppe lancers (with research)

Steppe Cavalry Influence in AoE2 Civs

1. Native Steppe Civs (Fully Nomadic) – Should Absolutely Have Steppe Lancers

:white_check_mark: Cumans, Tatars, Mongols, Huns, Turks
These are the true steppe raiders, living a nomadic lifestyle and using steppe cavalry extensively.
Already have Steppe Lancers (except Huns).
Turks Exception: The Oghuz Turks were originally steppe nomads and relied heavily on cavalry, but they transitioned into a more settled empire earlier than other steppe civs.

2. Subjects (Conquered or Allied with Steppe Peoples) – Could Justify Steppe Lancers

:warning: Slavs, Lithuanians, Poles, Chinese (Tang Dynasty era)
These civs ruled or were ruled by Steppe peoples and integrated Steppe cavalry into their armies.
Lithuanians and Poles had strong Tatar ties—Lithuanians especially recruited Tatars into their cavalry forces.

3. Mercenary Users (Hired Steppe Lancers) – Weak Justification, But Possible

:warning: Slavs, Poles, Lithuanians, Magyars, Bulgarians, Persians, Saracens, Armenians, Georgians, Byzantines
These civs hired steppe mercenaries, but they didn’t raise these units themselves.
Could justify a weaker/non-Elite version of Steppe Lancers.

4. Slave Soldiers (Used Steppe Warriors as Slaves) – Not a Strong Case

:x: Persians, Hindustanis, Saracens
Steppe warriors were sometimes used as slave cavalry (Ghulams, Mamluks, etc.), but this isn’t the same as fielding Steppe Lancers as a main military force.

5. Steppe Dynasties (Ruled by Steppe People but Not a Steppe Civ) – Mixed Cases

:warning: Hindustanis, Persians (Some Dynasties Like the Khwarezmians, Safavids)
These empires were founded by Steppe rulers but became more settled over time.

6. Steppe Dynasties That Lost Their Nomadic Ties – Unlikely to Get Steppe Lancers

:x: Bulgarians, Magyars, Gurjaras (possibly), Bengalis (sort of), Goths (sort of sort of)
These groups had Steppe origins but became fully settled civilizations with no real link to Steppe Lancers.
Magyars and Bulgarians have a small case for No-Elite Steppe Lancers.


Why Lithuanians & Poles Could Get Steppe Lancers (But Weaker Versions)

  • Lithuanians ruled Tatar lands and recruited Tatar cavalry into their armies.
  • Poles had Cossacks (who fought like Steppe warriors), but their focus was more on Hussars & heavy cav.
  • Giving them weaker or No-Elite Steppe Lancers (Lithuanians missing Blast Furnace) ensures balance without overpowering them.

How This Affects AoE2 Balance & Civ Design

  • Huns, fully upgraded with the discount they currently have on CA.
  • Turks, fully upgraded with the current bonus of light cavalry Sipahi UT.
  • Magyars, fully upgraded.
  • Goths, fully upgraded, BUT without Husbandry or Bloodline.
  • Bulgarians, not elite. But it is not so necessary. Only if you want to highlight their origins.
  • Gurjaras, with not a fully upgraded version – Since Gurjaras were influenced by steppe cultures but weren’t a dominant steppe civilization themselves, their Steppe Lancers should be slightly weaker than Mongol or Tatar versions.

How to Give It to Mercenary Civs:

New Tech: “Mercenaries” → Required before hiring Steppe Lancers (for mercenary-based civs).

  • Civs that already used Steppe Lancers natively (Mongols, Cumans, etc.) wouldn’t need it.
  • Discounted Mercenaries tech for Lithuanians (-50% cost) → Since they had big Tatar Ties into their cavalry.

Mercenaries as a Team Bonus

Since some Steppe civs historically served as mercenaries, one of them could have a team bonus that gives allies the Mercenaries tech for free, making Steppe Lancers more accessible to civs that relied on them.

The best candidate for this is the Cumans:

  • Cumans were widely used as mercenaries in Hungary, Bulgaria, the Byzantine Empire, and even by the Mongols.
  • They already have a tech that lets allies train their Kipchaks as mercenaries, making this a natural extension.
  • This would reinforce their identity as a “mercenary supplier” in the game.
  • Could move current team bonus to be a regular bonus.

Proposed Cuman Team Bonus:

:small_blue_diamond: Allies receive the Mercenaries tech for free.

Alternatively, Tatars could also fit this role, as they were often used as vassal cavalry forces. In that case, their bonus could instead make Steppe Lancers train faster or cheaper for allies after researching Mercenaries.

What is the Steppe Lancer?

The Steppe Lancer in Age of Empires II is not just any cavalry unit using a spear but specifically represents the mounted warriors of the Eurasian Steppe. Many civilizations across history fielded spear-wielding cavalry, but Steppe Lancers are distinct in that they originate from the vast, open grasslands of the Eurasian Steppe, stretching from Eastern Europe to Mongolia.

These nomadic warriors developed a unique style of warfare, relying on speed, mobility, and hit-and-run tactics, often using long lances to strike enemies before they could retaliate. Their combat style was perfected by various steppe peoples, including:

  • Mongols – Masters of mounted warfare, dominating Eurasia under Genghis Khan.
  • Cumans – A powerful Turkic people who raided and settled across Eastern Europe.
  • Tatars – Successors to the Mongols, maintaining steppe raiding traditions.
  • Huns – Early steppe raiders who pressured the Roman Empire.
  • Turks (Oghuz and Kipchaks) – Originally steppe nomads who used mounted lancers extensively.
    • The Oghuz Turks, ancestors of the Seljuks and Ottomans, came from the Central Asian steppe and relied on fast, lance-wielding cavalry before settling in Anatolia.
    • Even after becoming a more sedentary empire, the Turks retained steppe warfare traditions, with early Ottoman cavalry like the Akinci acting as light raiders in a style reminiscent of steppe horsemen.
  • Jurchens – Steppe-influenced horsemen from Manchuria.

Unlike knights or heavy cavalry, Steppe Lancers prioritized mobility over armor, making them highly effective in open battles but weaker in prolonged engagements. Their inclusion in Age of Empires II reflects the historical dominance of steppe-based cavalry forces rather than just spear-based horseback combat.

1 Like

Turks should also get them.

Chinese can get them via mercenaries.

2 Likes

One of the new chinese civs will have them as seen in the sneak peaks

1 Like

Unique/regional upgrade to steppe lancer become fire lancers?

I dont think that is a good idea as it will change a melee unit to a ranged one.+1 range is pretty much meele.

Here’s a civ addition to this list that most people wouldn’t instantly assume; Gurjaras.

While it looks like an odd choice, recent research has shown that the emergence of the Gurjaras has a lot to do with steppe civilisations.

Firstly, Indian texts written at the time describe the Gurjara armies in similar terms as they would the Hunas (Hunas being the multiple steppe civilisations that invaded India over the course of several centuries). And sometimes both in the same sentance.

The origins of the Gurjaras were likely a mixing of local populations with these various steppe cultures, leading to the Gurjaras having a similar unit composition as the latter. Modern genetic analysis even shows people from Gujarat having a much higher concentration of Central Asian and Irannic ancestors.

The plains of Gujarat are also pretty similar to the Central Asian steppe. A wide flat plain, perfect for horse-breeding and usage.

Arab chroniclers also describe the Gurjara armies as mostly comprised of horsemen.

Gurjara and later Rajput cavalry armour also bears a lot of similarities to the steppe lancer model. With vertical rectangular lamellar metal plates covering the body and a teardrop-shaped helmet.

tldr; the Gurjaras have a much stronger Steppe culture than would first be assumed, and the steppe lancer would be a perfect fit for them.

3 Likes

I think you should point out that Steppe Lancers do not represent the practice of spear-fighting on horseback (which is actually quite common) but rather warriors from the Eurasian Steppe: list.

  • Goth
  • Magyars
  • Turks (since it is actually an umbrella civ)

and I’m probably forgetting someone.

With the above in mind, why should the West Slavic Tribes be represented as Steppe Warriors? Genuinely, I am missing something.

I make my own list but it’s not totally comprehensive and just based on what I know.

Must have:

Huns. I think everyone would agree that they should have a bonus for them as well, maybe cheaper like cab archers.

Magyars. They choose this name instead of Hungarians so they should also represent their earlier incarnation in the same way Franks have throwing axes.

Bulgarians. In the dark ages they still were a Turkic civ not too dissimilar from Huns. Volga Bulgars too.

Turks. Again ottoman phase and Seljuk phase are crammed into this civ. Good candidate for a bonus.

Could have:

Persians. The definitely used a lot of steppe warriors although not native (that would be Parthians) it’s still a strong suit but it depends if mercenaries are included in a civ design.

Romans. Stilicho, Aetius, Odoacer and any other late Roman general basically had an Hunnish bodyguard at some point or strong ties with the Huns. Romans could be the only civ to only have both camels (North Africa anyone?) and steppe lancers but not their upgrades.

Chinese. Again big empires are always a federation of some kind and they’re likely to use warriors of other ethnicities near their borders. They should have the elite one though this time.

Byzantines. Similar reasoning although less strong but it’s not far from them having camels or gunpowder. If you consider their earlier phase the argument becomes stronger (there are a lot of Hunnish generals serving the byzantines at the times of Belisarius).

Goths. Would make more sense than gunpowder anyway since they absorbed Iranian steppe people such as parts of Sarmatians and Alans along their migration. Maybe no upgrade though.

Less likely / not knowledgeable enough to say:

Lithuanians, Poles and Slavs. They had to deal a lot with steppe people so it’s likely they used them themselves.

Gurjaras and Hindustanis. If you take into account their central Asian roots.

What about Saracens? Not sure but it’s a big empire and a huge umbrella so it sounds likely.

Burmese. Long shot, only if you consider them somehow related to Tibetans I guess? Correct me if I’m wrong.

Civs yet to be added who should have them:

Jurchens, Tanguts, Khitans, Tibetans, Uyghurs.

Other earlier Turkic/Mongolic civs in the sinosphere like the so called five barbarians (Xianbei, Tiele etc), Rourans and Gokturks.

Iranian central Asian civs: Alans, Hephthalites, Avars, Pechenegs, Khazars and Hunas.

Eventual Persian split: Khorasan, Bactria/Sogdia, Azerbaijan and Afghanistan.

Eventual Turks split to represent their earlier phase like the ones that have been proposed here.

Vandals could arguably have them, specially if no Alans civ is added. Their dominion in Africa was called the kingdom of the Vandals and the Alans. They would be the only Germanic civ who could have good infantry, ok cavalry and superb navy. Camels, dromons, steppe lancers and good cavalry archers. But if there are Alans the two aspects can be split.

1 Like

I had thought of them too, but then they called them Bulgarians and not Bulgars. And Bulgarians are nothing more than a mix of Thracians, and various ancient Slavic tribes. Bulgarians, despite their name, are Bulgars only to a very small degree.

But Thracians and Bulgars are peoples of the Eurasian Stepp. So maybe giving them the unit (maybe not elite) is OK in the end.

Oh yes.

If you want another list by chronological order: link.

So if I may summarise:

  • Huns, full upgraded with the discount they currently have on CA.
  • Turks, full upgraded with the current bonus of light cavalry Sipahi UT.
  • Magyars, full upgraded.

Then:

  • Goth, full upgraded, BUT without Husbandry or Bloodline. Source: link (it is not so easy to find the right balance).

Finally:

  • Bulgarians, not elite. But it is not so necessary. Only if you want to highlight their origins.
  • Gurjaras, as described above.
1 Like

The Srivamsha Rider model isn’t great. Looks too lightly armed.

1 Like

Yes but I don’t think anyone would want Bulgars split from Bulgarians so you just have to conflate the different ethnicities like Thraco-Romans, Slavs, Turks etc.

1 Like

I added Gurjaras to it, as well as listing the existing civs with steppe lancers for comparisons

1 Like

Not splitting those because there would be too many more civs added.

1 Like

Please add Turks to the list because Oghuz Turkic peoples were also nomads.

1 Like

You are confusing a part for the whole. Yes, there are Lipka Tatars and Polish Tatars who are Turks but we are talking about 14th century fugitives who probably descended from the Golden Horde. They contributed militarily with regiments of light cavalry, but nothing more.

The Turks should be 10/10 on that list. It’s not even a discussion honestly.

But nobody wants that, I think. I just don’t treat Bulgarians as a priority.

Ok, ill add turks to the list

1 Like

I apologise if I sounded a bit grumpy, but it is difficult to come up with a consistent method of assigning the unit.

Because if you try to do the light vs cavalry dichotomy, it doesn’t make much sense, because the Cumans have the Paldines, as do the Huns and the Lithuanians.

Even if you try to include fighting with a spear it doesn’t get any better, because most cavalry used the sword as a secondary reserve weapon. The heavy cavalry was equipped with spears (more or less elaborate and sophisticated) to break through the enemy line with a strong charge.

That’s why I was saying that the only decent way, imo, to assign the unit to civilisations rooted in the Steppe / Eurasian Steppe / Great Steppe or whatever you prefer to call it.

You don’t sound grumpy at all, i love how everyone is helping with how the unit should be given out, and which civs deserve it. I think giving it to 2 or 3 is a good amount of civs to get steppe lancers, mainly the ones who are historically accurate

Ye, this fits better, updated the google doc with these changes. Thanks