Suggestions to buff the Steppe lancers

My idea was to give them lower HP but higher DPS, maybe even 1 more range.
With this they can either be used to snipe siege or mix into cav/hussar groups for some extra punsh.

This way they would be a useful addition to the civs in certain sits but there would be no risk to make them op again.

Also easier to use if they have 2 range for lower elos. It’d bad if they would be OP in pro but complete trash in low elo.

And ofc reduce the elite upgrade cost a bit as it would only be a support unit then.


I think the elite should get the 2 range but keep the same cost as it now or not.

Any thread about Steppe Lancers should not start with stats but with clearly stating their purpose. Their main issue is redundancy with Knights. Buff them up to make them good and they will make knights useless, the problem will only be displaced.

I think their high speed and 1 range are good starting point Vs archers. Not at tanking them but at actually cleaning them. Paladin, Keshiks and even Hussars can be used in conjunction to do the tanking.

Add them bonus vs archers, cav archers too, 1 pierce Armor, maybe even lower a tiny bit their damages so they are meh vs heavy cavalry and they could be good enough. But that’s just an example.

Adding more range could be a graphical issue if their spear doesn’t match their actual range. But glass cannon cav is an interesting option (and could work Vs archers) for mixed compo. As for Elephant Archers, the upgrade cost is indeed the major issue for mixed compo.

Increasing cost (to make them more vulnerable since their defence stats should be close to light cav), damages by a large margin and reduce Elite upgrade cost could work.

Ahh yes. Let’s take this unit that is clearly supposed to be weak to archers because it has a good advantage over melee units as is and strip away the weakness to archers. Makes total sense.

Furthermore hussars, keshiks and paladins, already serve the role of being good against archers. So if you’re trying to differentiate them from other options then this isn’t a good one

Currently Steppe Lancers have no clear role, so I don’t really care about what their supposed role should have been.

Thinking a 1 range unit with high speed and decent pool of hp will be weak Vs archer was a design mistake. The only way they can win is when the said unit has overall bad stats which is currently the case. Once they close the gap, archers won’t be able to kite or clump which how massed archers win even against their supposed cavalry counters. If Lancers need to be made worse vs melee, then stats can be tweaked in some ways.

That said, I’m not that much into this particular solution. I’m just saying their role shall be redesigned and what has been done till now doesn’t matter cause it didn’t work.

but your proposed change already overlaps with existing units, which would continue with it not really having a role.

thinking a 1 range unit with high speed, better stacking then most cavalry, and etc is weak to melee units is a mistake.
meanwhile the Cataphract and Leitis prove that Low PA cavalry don’t do well vs archers. so your statement is contradictory to what we know to be true. Steppe Lancers, Leitis, and Cataphracts all don’t do well vs archers. period.

then how do crossbows beat knights? they have even more health and armor against archers then steppe lancers do.

hey guys, this unit stacks better then any cavalry out there that isn’t an archer, and has a 1 range advantage, how can we make it weak to melee? short of giving it negative melee armor or bad attack it wouldn’t work.

and again you say that you want to use hussars knights, or keshiks as a meat shield for this unit. well frankly speaking all of those units are all more then fine against archers, especially the keshik. you’re better off just going mass them vs archers then you are going steppe lancers.

i’d give lancers a small bonus vs infantry.

Yup, I think you’re right about making them vulnerable to melee would probably require some trick like a negative Armor (or super bad stats).

I would advocate that making them truly vulnerable to archers would require some similar trick. If we want to go this route, I think that adding them spear Armor (technically they have a spear) and removing their pierce Armor would be a good idea. It would also enable countering them with skirms. Being countered by 2 trash units is a good way to prevent OPness even with vastly buffed stats.

That would leave room to buff them Vs melee, as either generalists, anti infantry or anti cavalry. All of these variants could be glass cannonish.

Anti cavalry is kind of redundant with camels.

Anti infantry feels a bit dubious. They won’t be cataphracts and they would still get countered by spears. Anti militia feels a bit narrow, especially because the said civs have some sort of excellent cav archers.

Generalists feel right for me. This was the intended initial design. I only have a concern Vs heavy cavalry, cause their melee Armor can negate a big part of lancers damages. A small bonus vs cav (like +2) could work or a slow but strong attack (this would also go well with their kiting ability).

Or just leaving them at a low pierce armor, like they are now… you know, like the leitis and cataphract.

and yet when coupled with cav archers behind them, they would absolutely wreck infantry.

how so? they are literally called a light cavalry that is supposed to be weak to archers, that doesn’t sound like a generalist to me in any way shape or form.

I don’t think making this unit good vs archers is a wise choice. They have 9 attack, 1 range, 1Pa and 1.45 speed. So they are actually not that bad in general. The thing is, that they are not yet worthy, I mean 70f, 40G is still high cost, and they have only 60hp with only 1Pa, so this is bad, and they have slow ROF which is 2.3, so 3 things we should focus on, to buff the unit, which they are:

  • Their hp.
  • Their cost.
  • Their ROF.

IMO buffing these 3 points will be more than enough, so the steppe lancer should have:

  • 75 or 80 basic hp, with bloodlines they will be 95/100hp.
  • 2.1 ROF or less.
  • 60f, 35g cost.

Give them a bonus vs monks too, by these points they will have enough reasons to mass and using them, of course the Elite upgrade need a cost reduction too.

Leitis and cataphracts don’t have 1 range.

Cav archers on their own already wreck infantry.

When I was speaking about generalists, I was only speaking about melee generalists. Sorry if it wasn’t clear.

no they don’t. they just have higher HP (150), higher attack/higher attack rate.

debatable, and its still possible for them to take damage and they are super squishy. now if you give them am eat shield that specializes in taking out infantry, then they would be the better.

i doubt this ever happens honestly. at least the “or less part”. also i doubt this ever happens,

as it would overlap with the scout line.

Why? You think they will be OP? I mean 2.3 ROF is too high especially for a melee unit.

Higher HP isn’t going to save you Vs clumped archers. 1 range will. That’s why spear Armor would feel like an insurance that it won’t happen. Or at least that skirms will work too.

If I need a meat shield Vs infantry, why not going trashy Hussars ? If I need specifically a meat shield Vs pikes, using melee cavalry feels weird.

I can’t agree more with you about bonus Vs monks feeling redundant.

Considering the unit stacks like no other cavalry unit out there and has 1 range, yes. it would be op. go look at their attack rate upon release.

higher HP means you can survive longer. period. and survival is more important then damage output for melee units. it’s why they take the armor upgrades first.

no, it won’t. that 1 range won’t matter when your units are killed super fast.

because trashy hussars die even faster then steppe lancers do due to less range and stacking.
also steppe lancers train faster. don’t get me wrong - hussars are great meat shields - but if i’m going up against a halb siege push, you’re gonna struggle as a cav archer civ. now if we make it so that steppe lancers do better against infantry, that improves things for them.

Their ROF at release was 1.9, I am asking here for 2.1 but not 2.3, 2.3 it too high.

no, you were asking for 2.1 or LESS. and what i said was

as in, anything less then 2.1 won’t happen. and yes, i think anything faster then 2.1 would be a problem.

Or less means 2.0 not less than that. If 2.1 was still high then make it 2.0 like the ligh cav ROF.

or less, by definition, means anything less then 2.1 unless specified otherwise, which you didn’t until just now.

Because it is so clear, since I put the 2.1 as starting value, this means if didn’t work then make it less, this is the meaning of “or less”.

but again, there is no cap on “or less” in your original statement. which was my point. and even at 2.0 i believe they would be a problem.