I think Sicilians are completely useless, there is zero point picking them. Someone wishes he hadn’t bought the DLC, just because Sicilians are garbage and the mid-tier Burgundians don’t make up for it. This civ has no strong economy bonus, no strong military options. I think this never works. A civ should have at least either strong economy or strong military to be useful. For example Magyars or Vikings.
I suggest:
Donjons cost 75w/160s rather than 75w/200s
Justification: Donjons almost cost the double of a tower, but it is not nearly 2x as strong as towers. You have to mine 75 more stone to countertower, also 75 more to build a TC. Villagers can take down donjons easier than towers. Donjons might seem good on paper, but they are actually trash, and even I thought that they are useful
Serjeant cost 65f/25g rather than 60f/35g
Elite Serjeant +1 extra attack vs buildings
Justification: This unit too expensive considering what it gives. You can’t abuse its mobility, it is very slow and have very bad damage output which neglects the high armor. They are surprisingly underwhelming against buildings
Access to Thumb Ring, Ring Archer Armor, Redemption, Hussar, Bombard Cannon
Justification: The civ is not that bad in Castle Age, bottom 10 but totally usable. I think Thumb Ring is necessary, because it boosts their archers and skirmishers a lot, where they are supposed to be good, because they have the neglecting bonus damage bonus. Their Monks is just so trash, useless. Their lategame is trash too, the worst lategame by far. This civ has nothing in the lategame. Ring Archer Armor boosts their Arbalest survivability and their trash wars. Bombard Cannons makes them better against Siege civs, where they straight up lose instantly.
Sicilians are pretty bad… Basically the only thing they got going for them is donjon rushing but that doesn’t work without economy. I think Serjeants are the only strong point they have and don’t need buffs but they should definitely have better lategame if they have such a bad economy.
Either give them:
Eco buff (something small but considerable like houses cost -50%? Would also save wood as water civ)
or
Give them better lategame: Thumb ring or hand cannoneer. Archers would go perfectly along with Serjeants (they’ll still lack last armor upgrade)
I like the sicilians, i just think they gone to far with the no TC bonus in dark age…
If it was reduced from 100% to 25% instead of 0% they would be a great nomád civ
I agree both lotw civs need buffs. i think the devs were hoping the civs would be able to rely more on their UU/UT… and i think they didnt realise how bad the serjeant actually is for the cost
the lower food actually helps them in feudal/castle age, increasing their food might actually hurt them more before imperial…
i think even if they dropped the gold price by like 5, and gave them 2 or 3 extra bonus vs buildings it would give them more of a unique identity, then it might be ok they have such low dps vs units, because they hit buildings like mofos so there would be incentive to build them. and now that the knee jerking is over, people know how to counter them in feudal, so even if the bonus applied from feudal they will still be counterable
here i also think the devs thought their siege bonus would carry them, and then the pros complained too much and we lost it… but it actually made up for the lack lustre archers and weak end game, their trebs were much more likely to beat any generic trebs (i think) nevermind their mango duels or rams surviving mango hits…
i think they’re supposed to be a lower tech civ, and thus no bbc, so i dont mind if they dont have it, but they do need compensation for it…
Agree, I would make them actually 50f/35g to also diffentiate them from the militia line.
Also, the same thing as above. If they get bonus vs buildings the militia line would become obsolete.
With their comparable high pierce armor they are also much more suited for raiding than fighting buildings. That’s a waiste of their power.
What they need is any powerspike in feudal so they aren’t that far behind as they are now. They have basically no eco bonus until mid castle where the less resead comes in handy.
Even koreans have better eco if they mine some stone.
Maybe they could get 3 serjeants when hitting feudal…
They need an eco bonus in coherence of the design of the civ.
I suggest :
- donjon can train villagers at half of speed of a town center
Sicilians need a water bonus also, the team bonus is good but too niche.
Stuff like free War Galley could be cool.
On land these guys need something to their infantry, like 50% cheaper barrack technologies (to mirror the Burgundian bonus).
Another one maybe is free banking and coinage, useful in team games.
Just give them a food bonus and they Will be more than ok.
It could be they get +60f from deers or +100 from boars (not both), that could make them a pretty good scout rush civ
As sicily was alway the “corn chamber of italy” I would actually just give their farms 100 % more food, not the upgrades only.
So sicilians can make more early farms and also skip the furst farm upgrades because their farms can be reseeded later anyways.
This would allow them to be more active with food heavy units in feudal, especially their scrush, maybe a bit later because of the extra farms, but stronger in the exchange.
Agreed. +100% farm food since dark age and they are set
I feel the issue with the civ is that the bonuses, albeit not bad taken one by one, don’t seem to have great sinergy between them and with the tech tree, so they don’t seem to promote any strategy to use the civ with.
Eco bonuses might suggest to play the civ as a booming civ, but then their options are lackluster. Donjons might suggest a more aggressive playstyle, but that seems weird after all tower nerfs and definitely don’t work out in practice. 50% reduction damage is the main insuccess of the civ in my opinion. It is weird and overcomplicated, to really use his potential you need to recalculate how every sicilian unit trades with their counter to properly use it, which I don’t think people is really happy to do. At the end, one of AoE2 main strength is that his math is really simple and accessible to everyone. Overall, it’s situationally really strong bonus, but it’s also very unreliable, useless if opponent doesn’t go for counter units and probably suits more an aggressive playstyle that the civ don’t have any other bonus for.
So, before giving them some random buffs, I think the civ needs to take a direction. I’d like to see the booming identity of the civ buffed, giving them some legit option in the late game, maybe removing the bonus damage stuff to compensate (you honestly can’t give them thumb ring + last armour upgrade and/or hussar without removing the bonus damage reduction). Maybe even some improvement to a donjon defence in castle age, giving the building a defensive identity
The extra farm food is really good but it is a longterm game and not a good early bonus. 100% extra food without an upgrade would be great.
Daut was saying something interesting in his stream the other day, that is giving sicilians the ability to research farm upgrades one age before (like burgundians) while keeping the current bonus. I feel like it could be an interesting approach.
Aside that, I agree with suggestions of the OP, sicilians are not super weak, but they are kind of subpar at the moment. I would at the very least give them redemption and either one of thumb ring or ring archer armor. Donjons need a bit of adecrease in cost too.
For the serjeants I am less sure…maybe extra damage to building could be cool. They become an anti-building unit that way.
Giving them early food bonus would be risky. Remember their feudal scout win against spearman.
scout Rush paired with food bonus AND not countered by spearman would be scary.
I don’t think they need huge buff, and it is too early to discuss because people still don’t know how to use their strength. Just a little buff to Donjon and that’s it.
That’s why I proposed to just give their farms + 100%. It would strengthen their eco in early to mid castle age. Of course it would enable some more feudal agression but much less than other civs like franks or mongols.
I think the donjon needs a redesign. I would like to see it adjusted to be less “tower-rushy” and more: “Forward production and garrisoning building”.
Example: 100 Stone, 125 Wood, about 50 % more hp than towers - no arrows until garrisoned, but garrisoned vills fire 40 % more arrows (enough that every vill in castle age fires one).
This would allow to build donjons as defence against tower rushes, also to protect important ressources you mine, but not using them for an “empowered tower rush” in castle age.
The garrisoning space, high HP and building armor comes in handy when you pressure the opponent with the donjon play, but you need some archers to garrison and protect them against enemy military. Since archers are a great comb with the serjeants anyway, this would just lead to a smooth transition into a good comp.
This would make the donjon rush very unique and also much easier to balance because the oppresive threat of an unstoppable tower rush once it is established isn’t given.
I would also enable the serjeants to build+repair castles, siege + siege workshops (but at a reduced rate). If they can’t do this, you need to send vills forward and would lose the advantage of the serjeant rush, which is that you don’t need to risk your vills life in forwarding.
False, they are a very good scouts into knights civ aswell, feudal farm upgrade giving +100 food on farms is very OP whan making knights. Also the fact that the units take less bonus damge is very cool aswell, I remember this one match were i had 20 knights and engaged against my enemies similar 20 pike numbers and i survived with 13 or 14 knights left( I had all upgrades and my enemy had the first attack and both infantry armours. Also the fast that ur farms last very long means that there is a point in castle whan u can place a third stable and have even bigger knight numbers. The Sicilians are only good at this and donjon rushing which is enough for me
The problem is trash is actually not that frequently used in higher level castle age play.
Usually your response to knights is:
Either match them with your own knights, or mass enough archers to kill them.
Combined with: build monks.
Same against archers, where you replace monks with siege.
Trash units are usually only used when you are already on the back foot. So yeah it is a good feudal and post imp bonus and makes it easier to finish of a player, but if you dont have any bonus to get ahead in the first place, while other civs do, this will be rarely enough.
Yeah the 50 % red bonus damage is bs. It would be OP if they had a strong line, but as they have less than average lines and almost every civ has a better line, it’s almost useless.
They need to have hussar and anything which forces the enemy into also producing trash Like if their trash would be stronger, it would force the opponent to make counter-trash, too.
Maybe, the bonus could be: Land military units inflict 25 % more bonus damage and receive 33 % less. This would make it very interesting to play around this with your own trash.
How do they have less then average knight line?
Hussar for a civ that takes 50% less bonus dmg?
Indirectly, they have almost no eco bonus.