Cumans 2nd TC ruins the game

I played some games with Cuman second feudal TC it always gave me trouble. Maybe you want to use donjons or other early stuff with Sicilians but I suggest going to Castle age and get automatic upgrade for your donjons and unique unit (as I understand it’s auto and free). You can pressure with donjons or make a siege workshop and build mangonels. Or build a forward Castle.

I was playing in Arena and tried to use second TC I am castle dropped and second TC was in range, I evacuated about 20 Vils, advanced to castle age trained Capped rams and steppe lancers (because Vietnamese trains unique unit and has Vils can’t attack Castle in Feudal).

Basically when you use second TC you get pressured and see a lot of forward buildings. Feudal army trash against Castle Age one so you advance to next age while trying to quickwall micro garrison your villagers (in Arena you just need to evacuate Vils). If you can build some capped rams with knights or steppe lancers to clean forward buildings. It’s hard and risky.

said the man whose profile pic is a feudal age UU

Sorry I had to 11

5 Likes

The Cumans feudal boom is the worst and most useless boom in the game especially in open maps like Arabia. The start is really hard for Cumans playet since he will lack of food to keep producing vills from both tcs and the time to build the 2nd tc is really long. People nowadays if they see the Cumans player booming then it is actually like free win because the Cumans player can’t defend him self because all his resources on booming. If you asked me personaly, i prefer to delete the 2nd tc and give the cumans an eco bonus but not because the 2nd TC is op, but because it is useless!!! When i play Cumand i don’t boom, i just go scout rush with thier +5% speed and have the advantage then go castle with Kipchaks or knights, this is better for me than the useless booming.

1 Like

I understand what you mean .

However if you look at the second town centre in other side , it create some special build order for Cumans like feudal trush + second tc boom etc…

I don’t think it ruins the game , instead its a chance for cumans player invest on some different strat

Imagine every game your opponent just go for M@A into archer
And every civ only have +15% faster lumberjacks
Will you still playing aoe2?

Having lots of factor in aoe2 is the reason why this game still have plenty of fans supporting this game from 1999 to 2021 (at least in my opinion)

2 Likes

In my opinion the essence of AoE2 are the following things:
-Graphic style,
-Medieval Setting,
-Quite simple unit design, meaning no activatable skills, Auras, charge attacks etc. With monks being the exception. (Bulgarians were the first big exception that was made against this rule)
-Civs being all very equal in their options with just slight variations (yes Meso Civs are different, and for that reason I dont like playing them, but it was necessary to be able to include them at all)
-Unit training time is as much as an important stat as unit cost, units are trained one at a time and controlled one at a time, there are no batches of units.
-there are no buffs or debuffs. There are technologies that are permenant, but you cannot reduce any other stats but the health of enemy units.
-the game is heavily eco focussed. Generally a military advantage often can be outcompeted by a stronger economy. And military and economy are a balance. You cannot go all in with military without sacrificing your economy in turn.
-newly generated maps with ressources spread throughout, leading to both scouting and map control being immensely important, which is further facilitated by the hill bonus, leading to the formation of strategic positions to hold and defend.

1 Like

if Chinese or Britons were released today people would have a conniption, but feudal tc broke the game.

3 Likes

This is kind of a very subjective perceiption of the OP.
Where to draw the line? Two TCs are not within the ‚essence of the game‘ but six starting villagers are? You could argue that the ‚essence‘ is to start with three.

In general, I like new mechanics, as long as they are not (intentionally) broken like the Coustillier.

So far none of the ‚new‘ civs (like Cumans, Malay, etc) are picked that frequently; neither in tournaments, nor in ranked.

4 Likes

That second TC takes a lot of time to be built and costs a lot of wood. You could speed it up by using more vills, but then you would show down your eco in the process. You don’t have to build that tc

1 Like

I am not debating whether feudal TC is broken or not.

Vikings and britons are what a real aoe2 civ should be. They might have eco or militar bonuses, but 1tc in feudal like it should be.

Sicilians have 1tc in feudal

Feudal TC may not be OP. May have it´s counter strategy. But it still broke the game.
I just can’t enjoy playing against a cuman 2tc waller/boomer.

I‘m not sure whether you misunderstand us on purpose or just refuse to see that it‘s only YOUR perception that Cuman‘s second TC does not fit into the game. It‘s an arbitrary line you draw for yourself. There is no reasoning whatsoever.
Out of curiosity: why is the Chinese six vill start ok for you, but a second TC in Feudal is not?

2 Likes

i dont see any problem with cuman double tc you gonna be castle wayyyy before him go all in mangonel/ramknigh or archer pikeman monk on him hes died . Cuman are actually on the low tier

3 Likes

6 vills but with 0 food at start does not change the game completely as 2tc in feudal does.

Chinese have an eco bonus, not a game changer.

And you are literally forced to rush castle age. It’s suuuuch a horrible civ the cumans, but I see you don’t agree.

Really ironic coming from the Serjant profile pic, where the Sicilians are pay to win feudal donjon rush

1 Like

I haven’t tried them yet.

I don’t have the DLC. I just like how they look.

I am not happy at all with sergeants being able to build dougeons though, but at least they can’t build a 2nd tc in feudal 11.

Your not forced its just the best option but you can go whatever you want and win,i rly dont get it why a 46% winrate civ trouble you that much

1 Like

U will get outboomed so bad if you don’t rush caste age.

It’s not about being op or not, it’s about changing the game in a bad way.

You’re sounding like a broken record by now. You say it doesn’t fit as a aoe2 bonus but have no arguments as to why so while other bonuses do fit.
Forced to rush castle age? Incas always play the same strat every game with their trush and dictate the pace you play at, you don’t see people complaining having to play extended feudal age

4 Likes

I prefer removing this civ entirely alongside with Sicilians, Burgundians and Huns. All the bonuses can be used for a future civ (All the Hun bonuses to represent the Uyghur Empire etc.) expect the stupid 2TC boom, First Crusade, Revolution and Capped Ram (which ruined Arena with the stupid 2 Castle Arambai).

You just compared having +1 atack +1 defense vils in feudal to have A 2ND TC

Tower rushes have always existed. They actually got nerfed in DE.

Any time you go afressive (not only with towers) (Not only with incas), it’s obvious that feudal time will be extended. Part of the game. Not something exclusive for incas.

You can’t remove huns. They are great

They are an utterly foolish civ for a medieval game. The exact bonuses could be used for another nomadic civ.

1 Like