Why were Steppe Lancers imbalanced when they were first released but Kamayuks were not?

The reasons why Steppe Lancers were broken upon DE release was because of

1. Their 1 range, which allowed steppe lancers to attack from behind other steppe lancers
2. Their small collision size, which enabled them to stack more heavily than other cavalry

Well Kamayuks share both these traits. They also have 1 range, and they can stack just as well as Steppe Lancers can because infantry stack better than Cavalry. They also defeated Steppe Lancers in equal numbers (they cost the same too) because Steppe Lancers' 1 range advantage is gone against Kamayuks. Yes its true that theory =/= practice but practically both units crush their supposed counters in large numbers. Steppe Lancers can beat Paladins, Camels and Halberdiers cost effectively as shown in early DE games. Well here is how Kamayuks perform against Champions and Paladins.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=p6c5vd9QrFg Skip to 7:58

They also have good pierce armor and move faster than Champions, so they aren't weak to archers either. Only hand cannoneers, which are an Imperial Age unit.

So what made Steppe Lancers more broken?

Is it because they are built from the Stables while Kamayuks needed a castle?

Is it because they had faster movement speed?

Is it because the civs that had Steppe Lancers were inherently strong, while Incas were mediocre?