Why the Konnik is a bad unit and needs improvement

Let’s look at the Konnik, the unique unit of the Bulgarians. For our comparison let us use two similar units, both in price and in function, the Knight and the Boyar, one regular unit and one unique unit, both considered to be well balanced.

The Elite Konnik compared to the Paladin lacks 40 HP and 1 pierce armor, to compensate for that the Konnik spawns a unit comparable to the longswordsman upon death. They can be made from Kreposts which is an advantage over other unique units but considerable worse than only requiring stables like the Paladin. The Boyar by comparison lacks 30HP but receives +4 melee armor compared to the Paladin.

What this means in practice is that a FU Paladin can take 60 hits from a FU Arbalest, the Boyar 50 and the Konnik 30 + an additional 10 from the dismounted Konnik. In Cavalry combat the Konnik is equal to the Paladin, the winner coming down to who hits first, while the Boyar wins comfortably with about a third of his health left.

So far we can see the use of the Boyar, an excellent melee fighter offset by a slightly stronger vulnerability to range and having to be created at castles. The balance is good since overall it’s preferable over the Paladin but harder to amass.

The Konnik on the other hand is terrible against ranged units and equal in melee. There is only one situation where the Konnik is better than the Paladin and that is against Halberdiers. The problem is that you never want to use the Konnik against Halberdiers since it’s still a terrible trade and you’ll be left with a nigh useless dismounted Konnik. But that is not all, the situation for the Konnik is even worse since you have to research Stirrups to get the attack speed to be the same as other cavalry and you also have to research infantry armor for the dismounted Konnik. This is not trivial, you will require alot more resources and time compared to the player who goes with Paladin and you end up with a unit that’s overall less desirable than it.

I have discussed here the situation of the FU Konnik and one might object that it’s a unit that excels in the Castle Age, because it can be created from the Krepost and is thus more readily available than say the Boyar. To that I will simply say that the Konnik is not a good Castle Age unit since you would have to build a Castle anyway in order to research Stirrups and without it the Konnik is just as bad in it’s non-elite version, having only the slightest advantage in a knight-fight and is considerably worse against crossbows.

The Konnik is therefore a weak unit and was sadly over-nerfed in previous patches and there needs to be a change either in the power of the unit or in the cost and time it takes to upgrade it. If the Konnik is supposed to be strong and quicker to amass in the Castle Age it cannot be required to have tech from both a Stable and a Castle. If it’s meant to be strong in the Imperial Age then Konnik needs to be stronger than the Paladin just as the Boyar is and even more since it requires more tech investment than the Boyar.

6 Likes

Konniks are better than Paladins, and are one of the best UUs in the game.

They win against their own counters, and need 2 different counter-units to be neutralized, at the same time.

16 Likes

I already responded to both your claims in my original post.

The Konnik is equal to the Paladin in melee and much worse against ranged. They are slightly better against pikes and halbs but it’s still a terrible trade so no one in their right mind would go in with Konniks against halbs. Useless UU that’s worse than Paladin while requireing far more investment…

1 Like

I know, I have read it, but it still does not make it a unit that needs improvement.

If it can beat Paladins, and counters the units that counter the Paladin, then it is in a great situation.

And no, it does not require a greater investment than Paladin. I am glad Bulgarians lost Paladins, ads it is such an overly efficient unit, that any civ that has them will just B-line towards them.

We need less Paladins, and Konniks work.

I’m not gonna read that long post. Sorry. It pointless. Konniks are an amazing UU, better than paladins in many ways (they beat paladins and are really difficult to counter).

This argument is useless

11 Likes

They do not counter Halberdiers. If you use your Konniks against Halbs you will lose the game, it’s as simple as that. They only trade slightly better than Paladins, not even close to offsetting their weakness against ranged let alone their cost of investment.

1 Like

They do, however, trade against Camels much more effectively than Paladins ever could.

Stirrups also helps your other Stables units, so you end up with great Hussars, and the fact that Konniks can be produced from Kreposts, is a huge point in their favour, since even though they still cannot be made in the numbers that Stables can, Kreposts are much hardier structures and can defend your Town, while Stables cannot.

If you don’t read the post, do the forum a favor and don’t respond.

9 Likes

Konnik trade good against Halbs, only Cav UU what trade better is Cata. Of course, in Konniks case it is not cost-effective, but mean Halbs cant stop them when they attack Archers or Siege. Will force oponent to make champs or heavy cav. Konnik also kill Camels (even Imp Camel), so is very difficult to kill raiding Konniks.
And Bulgarians have good siege of their own to counter archers, and decent CavArchers and Skirms (they miss last armour)

2 Likes

They obviously trade with camels exactly as they trade with halbs but since camels is a less effective counter than halbs against cavalry they would be closer to getting an equal trade.

Bulgarians get some good bonuses and their hussars is one of them although I’d argue they are still a weak civilization but that’s beside the topic.

Not to mention that Bulgarians haver Free upgrades to the Militia line, and 2Hs with Bagains beat generic FU Champions quite easily.

Bulgarians are great.
If the Konnik was ever buffed, it would likely end up making the whole civ OP.

You do make some valid points with halbs and it not being a good castle age unit but I think you’re using konniks wrong.
Kreposts are incredible map control structures and allow very easy forwards, mass halbs while dangerous to konniks, can’t raid. Bulgarian tech tree has other things in arsenal to prevent the enemy for going Halb siege (free militia upgrades and SO)
Overall, it’s hard to beat konniks’ population efficiency and cost efficiency

7 Likes

Konnik are stronger than you think simple because their animation death actually puts them at advantage vs archers as the archers have to refocus to attack. For example, the enemy gathered enough to one shot boyars and you throw 20 boyars at him, he can micro 20/25 times and win depending on the pathing but against konnik he has to micro 40 times.

I think stirrups could be made available in the krepost and they could increase 10 hp on its infantry and a slight .05 speed. It should be a better two handed swordsman. For this, i propose also an increase cost of 5 gold.

You don’t require more resource but you require more time to fully upgrade konnik as for less price than a knight you get a knight and a longswordsman (so you are saving food+gold)

Also you wrote that boyar tank less than paladin against arbalest so how are they better? They are better in melee but worse in pierce which means paladins are better in pierce and worse in melee which means boyars aren’t better than paladins always and that paladins are better than boyars sometimes.

Other than slightly buffing their infantry, i don’t think they require anything.

The really funny thing is they are considered infantry and cav civ but they miss both cav and infantry final upgrade which is contradictory.

But this is not urgent, The real urgent thing that needs nerf are leitis and capping lith max relic bonus to +3.

1 Like

I think it shouldn’t. The Krepost are super good to push your opponent and they can create army. However konniks built in such a rush won’t be as their max power, which is a good thing as they are hard to counter especially if it’s earlier in the game. If you could get Stirrup that fast it would make this rush too strong.

No different than Malian being “infantry” and not getting halbs, or Khmer being “siege” and not getting siege onager. It’s an interesting twist to replace FU units with non FU units that get a strong bonus instead.

2 Likes

Not really. Krepost cost enough that you have to sacrifice villagers to get it up (and to build it) and stirrups costs enough that you would have to decide between that and having a knight level konnik or actually creating 3 knights + 2/3 more (vills sacrified on stone, building time of krepost researching stirrups time while not creating military)

Your reasons aren’t completely wrong so krepost stirrups could have addional time cost (like feudal tc for cumans)

Well, Khmers have one of the best elephants in game and they also have the best scorps in game.
Halbs isn’t the main unit line of infantrymen and malians have a very good militia line with their extra pierce armor, even if they are lacking 2 damage. But yeah malians is somehow similar but the thing with bulgarians is that they have 2 civ special, infantry and cav.

All their Melee Cavalry attacks faster, and their 2Hs beat generic FU Champions, while upgrading for free.

Sounds like a Cavalry and Infantry civ.

2 Likes

civ currently sitting at less then a 52% win-rate across all levels of play (and that winrate goes down as you increase the skill level), with an easily denied bonus needs nerfs.
https://aoestats.io/stats/RM_1v1

dont forget their solid defense due to krepost
the fact that they save stone as in on town centers.
that their BS upgrades get researched faster
and that they get solid HCA to mix in as well.

1 Like

Konnik are stronger than you think simple because their animation death actually puts them at advantage vs archers as the archers have to refocus to attack. For example, the enemy gathered enough to one shot boyars and you throw 20 boyars at him, he can micro 20/25 times and win depending on the pathing but against konnik he has to micro 40 times.

This could have a marginal effect although one might as well say that it’s a weakness since it means it’s far easier to one shot the horse unit (requiering only half the number of arbs as a Pala) leaving you with an army of easily kited longswords. In the end I don’t think this matters much, the number of hits you can take in total is the important metric here.

Also you wrote that boyar tank less than paladin against arbalest so how are they better? They are better in melee but worse in pierce which means paladins are better in pierce and worse in melee which means boyars aren’t better than paladins always and that paladins are better than boyars sometimes.

It’s quite simple, the Boyar is bit more vulnerable to ranged (50 hits instead of 60) but has 4 more melee armor making it an excellent melee fighter, their niche is clear and logical. The Konnik has double the penalty (40 hits) but is no better than the Paladin in melee. Instead it’s being slighty better at fighting a unit that it should under no circumstance fight, the halberdier. It’s nonsensical.

However konniks built in such a rush won’t be as their max power, which is a good thing as they are hard to counter especially if it’s earlier in the game. If you could get Stirrup that fast it would make this rush too strong.

I actually agree with you here. Heavy Cavalry has a huge power spike in early Castle and giving Stirrups too early could tip that balance a little over the top. I think it’s better to allow the Konnik to scale better in the late game.