Suggestion for Turks

As this video, Viper ranked the Turks as worse as the Goths. I believe that the problem of the Turks may not be only in Arabia. We discussed many times about the adjustment on the Goths recently, but it seems that the Turks also need some helps.

The current bonus that the gold miners work 20% faster is good literally but it still needs some adjustments. I suggest that change it to that the mines contain extra resources, maybe +20% or +25%, similar to Tatars sheep and Mayans resources.

Then, maybe add the elite skirmisher?



They are no worse than turks, the order is more and less alphabetical order with few exceptions, which were not intended.

Turks lack an early economic bonus, and that is huge in arabia 1v1. Most civs in tier C y D lack dark age economic bonuses, except lituans, which almost was dropped in B tier.

My main concern with turks is that the use of both castle for jannies and bombard towers because of artillery is very expensive. I would give them a stone related bonus (extra stone, or free stone upgrades). This wont help them before castle (unless tower rush or selling it in market), and help a bit in castle, with an effect more noticeable in open maps (because in closed maps they are already good and dont need more stone).

Vyper says that their main problem is that archers counter them so bad. I dont know what to do about this, but I prefer them to not receive elite skirm upgrade.

1 Like

We have on this forum idea to give Turks Asap - new trash unit, cheap, fast creating in Barracks, fast and with bonus vs archers. This will solve many problems for Turks, and will be historicaly accurate.

Unpopular opinion, Turks are ok, they just need either a buff to Spearman and Skirmishers (+15 HP or +2 Movement Speed) in the Imperal Age; or an Asap Trash UU.

Turks Jannies are OP in the Castle Age, and their Imperial army is great, so long as they have Gold. Their only weakness is lack of goo Foot Trash.
Artillery is not overly expensive either, since it makes Bombard Cannons, and Bombard Towers, that much more effective.

The “mines” here include the gold and the stone, so probably meet your opinion.

New UU may be hard, since the least changed solution will be chosen by the development team.

Then, in the sipirit of Asaps (which could just use the Eastern Swordsman model), just give Spearman and (Foot) Skirmishers a small bonus in Imperial.

Not every civs needs to be balanced for 1v1 Arabia. You have other maps and team games. Turks is just no 1v1 civ, but can be pretty good in team games where gold is no issue because of trade. They are bottom tier because they have no real late game trash units.

A slight buff is possible, but they do not really need a massive boost.


Give Turks access to Steppe Lancers. Sipahi affects Steppe Lancers. Like their free Scout line upgrades, the Elite Steppe Lancer upgrade is also free (or has a heavy discount.) Tanky Steppe Lancers with a free/cheap upgrade could be the solution to archers and post-Imperial fights the Turks are looking for, and while keeping their trash as low quality as it is.

1 Like

Please no! Enough Steppe Lancer civs. the Turks in game are Seljuks and Ottomans, not the Turkmen of the Steppes anymore.
Sipahi can only be so strong (essentially double Bloodlines) because it affects only one unit. If it affected several, it would have to be nerfed to irrelevancy.

Do not forget that Turks already have free upgrades to Light Cavalry and Hussar, not to mention free Chemistry.


Please yes! There are not enough Steppe Lancer civs.

1 Like

There are. there are as many as there are Eagle Warrior civs. This would only be acceptable if the rest of Turks would be nerfed to the ground.

No free techs.
No Bloodlines (+40 hp Steppe Lancers? Broken OP!).
Janissaries -2 range -3 damage.
Artillery +50% extra cost.
No Galleon.
Gold gather bonus halved.

Just give them Anarchy for Archery Range Janissary in Castle age.

It’ll change the game.

1 Like

For the worst.

<20 characters>

What I find Turks suffer most is having lack of Military choice. Especially vs Archer civilization. Their economy is good tho. They really need Elite Skirmisher and Onager to counter vs Archer civs. Give them Imperial Camel even if they want to make a civ which has worst spearman.


For the fun.

It won’t ruin top level play because it’s a castle age option and most maps are not won by the map control gained in Castle age. There will be a distinct range of play in the “I get what I’m supposed to do, I just don’t understand why I need to do it now” tier where this change will ruin things.

You do realise that 5 Jans 1 shot a Mangonel, right? They also outrange Crossbowmen.

Yeah, maybe you should go check the last Turks thread and reminded everyone of that so they’d stop ragging on a top-tier UU because they have no idea what they’re talking about.

The turks problem has always been, and will always be, that they suffer with no gold. My problem with that (because I don’t have a problem with the premise, it should be a struggle to win without gold income, and having a civ further to that extreme isn’t a big deal) is that they don’t exactly roll people when they do have gold. Why do they need to be so gold dependent and weak when it’s off the map if they aren’t just dynamite with it?

Their problem isn’t the gold. We all agree that they have a gold army worth it’s weight in… Gold, when they can field it. Their problem, which is ridiculous, is Stone. They can’t put down the castles and keep them down to make use of the gold effectively. Give them a unique tech for them to bypass extra castles and that stone dependency disappears, then they will truly suffer without gold with effective respect to how dominant they SHOULD be with it. That’s my point of view.

How I see it, if you don’t have both stone and gold, in castle age, secured, Turks suffer. Get rid of the stone dependency a bit and the civ will play like it should naturally work, focused on the one resource that keeps an actual army on the field as opposed to villagers with dishes for shield and forks for weapons.

This is what makes the most sence historical wise. Turks (free lightcavs) and Mongols (extra HP for light cavs) were the first steppe civs in this game and since mongols already got steppe lancers, why shouldnt turks get them as well? It would also solve the archer issue, if steppe lancers are supposed to be anti-archer (groups). Free elite steppelancers is hard to judge, might be a bit too much, but it could give them a nice powerspike without affecting closed maps too much, considering they are currently only bottom teir on openmap/grush wars.

Also instead of considering to add a completly new trash unit for them, its maybe smarter to use what is already there: sipahi gives +20 for CA, why should this not also include +20 HP for lightcavs? (name wise according to aoewiki sipahi was just a general term for turk cavalry, it didnt mean only CA, just another small argument for it) This means turks would have one of the best hussars in the game: not as good vs archer fire as tatar ones, not as much HP as mongol ones and not as much attack as bulgarians ones, but overall extremly good. The handicap for this is the lack of pikemen/eliteskirm, which would also make sence.

For darkage bonus i’m unsure if it’s smart to give them longer lasting gold, because that barely helps them in darkage/feudal. I would prefer here to increase the gold mining from +15% to +30% and remove the last gold mining upgrade.

1 Like

Give turks torsion engines for bombard cannons.


give them 256 tech mod version of torsion engines for bombard cannons.