on one hand some Infantry Unique units are clearly better versions of the Militia in some way (Samurai, Berserk, Jaguar Warrior) etc.
on the other hand others are clearly not designed to fill the same role, like the TK, Throwing Axeman, and Shotel as a good example.
furthermore some civs clearly don’t need the buffs this would give their civ (Aztecs, Vikings, Celts at the top of the list) and on the other hand others would clearly benefit from it.
I have the impression samurai are the only UU to be truly overshadowed by champs.
Berserkers, woads, TK, TA, and a coupe of other ‘infantry’ UUs don’t need a buff, as far as I’m aware.
Jaguars do need a buff, but it’ll be tricky to find an appropriate compensatory nerf for Aztecs. Maybe something like removing arbs or the starting gold could work, and could create enough space to make Jags somewhat awesome.
Personally I’d enjoy a complete samurai rework, focused more on the history and less on the mithos, but I don’t expect that to happen.
Some units could use some love (samurai, karambit, shotel) but others would become OP (berserkers, huscarl, woad raiders). I would just reduce the cost of karambitsand shotels, and probably I’llmake samurai faster
They’re good when used to defend against melee, e.g. if you have siege onagers and the enemy builds cavalry.
That being said, they could probably have their food cost reduced to 65 without overbuffing the Teutons but they don’t really need a buff either. I think adjusting supplies to include unique units is probably too broad a buff - they should just buff unique infantry as needed
Wasn’t supplies mainly introduced to make sword line more appealing in castle age?
Anyway I’d be perfectly fine with Champs becoming a clearly inferior option for certain civs with an infantry UU, kinda like CavArchers are for Mongols, where the Mangudai pretty much fills the role of the CavArcher plus more.