Slavs seem like a great balance to the Byz with a versatile tech-tree, fused with an economic bonus that shines from the Feudal Age on, much like the Vikings. The sooner I mass archers outside of their town, the safer I feel. Boyars are basically mobile Teutonic Knights, but thankfully I've been spared matching champions that fight like FU cataphracts. And if I have to fend off their massed siege I find myself turning more and more to bombard cannons. When facing a Slav opponent in a 1v1 situation I attack during the Dark Age, before the farm bonus begins to shine. If anything, massed mangudai might be more effective than longbowmen. better siege and the low pierce armour of champs and boyars against masssed mangudai. Seems pretty consistent with the arguments of cheaper siege vs. In terms of historical conflicts between these civilizations, the Slavs and Byz went back and forth for hundreds of years, but when the Mongols entered the scene they won handily. My answer would have to be that massed siege in AoK is an analogue for the ambushes and sudden reversals in warfare that, for example, the Byzantines repeatedly suffered against the Bulgars. I have no quarrel with the Slavs, but I'm curious about why they benefit from cheaper siege units as a civ bonus.
