DLC Lord of the West - 2 New Civs

[Nico71203]

It’s hard to give some thoughts about the civs right now, but here’s my first impressions with what we know :

• Burgundians

Surprisingly they only have two civ bonus (Like Persian). I think at this point Team Bonus hasn’t be reveal yet, but they will surely have one.
As it is, eco bonus sounds very interesting and open to many strategies. 50% refound for Knights sounds strong (Hmm more useful than Saracens Monk UT ? ).

Coustillier UU : “a powerful shock attack when charging into battle”, well does that mean an active special hability ? I’m curious to see how it would fit into the game… But why not !

Speaking about innovations, the UTs : All new UTs are just one time effect techs. And it’s sounds very weird… like in aoe2 there are just three UT techs like this (Atheism, Paper money, Cuman mercenaries). Giving both new Civs non-passive effect UTs doesn’t sound very coherent with the 35 existing one…

For example I would rather have, Burgundians Vineyard : Once researched, it reduces the player’s food trading fee, and set a higher minimal price (for the rest of the game)

Well for Flemish Revolution we don’t know how strong it can be, but on paper I wonder how cavalry civs will deal with a massive army of pikes coming out of nowhere

• Sicilians

They seems to have an interesting identity, bonus and UTs looks almost like a combo in a card game (Build TCs faster => Summon an army of infantry => Build 1000 donjons with them)

For Sicilians, either they have a horrible tech tree, either they will receive an insta nerf I believe 100% faster Castle drop can break the game… Damages reduction sound powerful too.

Like Burgundians I’m not a big fan of the UTs, I would prefer something like First Crusade : Serjeants are produced 50% faster OR can be produced in TCs.
Something a bit more “classic”. Scutage seems to be an alternative stronger version of Paper Money.

Overall, It was unexpected but it’s great that developers add new civs ! Hope they can keep the coherence with all that already existing tho

[SouBotsito]

The next expansion after this one will have nice features such as civ tibetans: UT a favor from budda: you can defeat a player from the other team and sacrifice one ally or yourself.

Venetians, cause we need more europeas civs, ships have the ability to walk on land.

Croatians: UT monks walk 100% faster

Australians, they can train wolves and bears, UT poison spiders all archer have trample damage.

We are losing the game… and yet this guys are happy with that, once they would finish they beloved campaigns and few games vs the IA, they will leave, but us the multiplayers will have to see our game dying.

[JonOli12]

@SouMexican

We are losing the game…

Maybe you are losing the game. I am getting it E X P A N D E D !

[Szaladon]

@SouMexican

We are losing the game… and yet this guys are happy with that, once they would finish they beloved campaigns and few games vs the IA, they will leave, but us the multiplayers will have to see our game dying

How can you call my hundreds of hours in DE (over 1k5 on HD) losing the game?

This game is way too addicting ngl.

[JonOli12]

I was with this game when it launched in 1999. Always was a RTS player, and would even go hungry to save up lunch money so that I could get the newer ones.

More than 90% of this community has always been SP. SP games are on the rise too, while MP and Esports are last decade’s news.

More civs and more campaigns will guarantee another 1000 hours of my play time in this game, even in MP matches.

Learn to adapt to an ever-changing Meta with new elements added in regularly, or drop your precious MP rank.

[Szaladon]

Agree that they could have been more conservative, though as seen on the announcement post, a lot might change still.

They both don’t have a Team bonus yet either.

[MatCauthon3]

@SouMexican

Keep playing your campaigns and let us rant, u werent there before and you wont be here after you finish your single player games.

I love how you just casually insult the majority of the community and act as if they weren’t here from the beginning. I know plenty of SP people who were here at launch and through until now, and going forward, there is something like 400k people who have attempted at least one game of Multiplayer.
DE has sold between 2 and 5 million copies on steam alone, which means at best 20% of the community has ATTEMPTED some form of Multiplayer, and that is assuming microsoft store has zero copies sold, which is highly unlikely.

[letmepickthis]

I called it that there would be more civs even when they stated “there will not be anymore civs”, but I predicted 5-8 years instead of 1. The greed is real 11. I still can’t believe they are making 2 civs that are basically already in the game. AOE2 has predominantly made umbrella civs which there is nothing wrong with but now they are making civs under an umbrella civ which ruins the game design.There are so many more areas that don’t have any representation which would keep their umbrella civ design and they do this?! Now people have the right to demand 5 Indian civs and 5 Chinese civs since they opened this can of worms.

[Jomatthi]

I have played this game moslty as a multiplayer, and I find it simply amazing. I always have a ton of fun with others when playing it, the players are really nice when talking and the balance is quite nice.

I really do not know why you think we are “losing the game”, I still find it amazing as when it was launched. And when you think that it is still getting new content, we should be really happy about it. Balance will come, better pathfinding too, and the bugs will be gone too. Let’s give the devs our complete support, they deserve it.

[Soldeo]

@XuanZue

just saying what is obvious.

February will be the real balance-whine.

People being ignorant about all-in mechanics are just helping to destroy the game. Cumans never had all-in mechanincs that’s the reason they were balanced.

@SouMexican

Keep playing your campaigns and let us rant, u werent there before and you wont be here after you finish your single player games.

Seriously most of the tryhards from the MP community and their negative exaggerated comments are cringe which reeks of manchild. I’m thankful that TheViper, Hera, dogao and the rest of the pro scene are just cautiously aware, calm and actually excited to see new mechanics in the game. They’re truly the exemplar of professionalism and responsible adults.

I think most people buy and play AoE 2 for their quality campaigns and civs. As for me part of the SP community, the campaigns in AoE 2 are one of the most replayable I’ve played in any game franchise besides Warcraft and Starcraft. I see myself and other dedicated SP players not leaving after “finishing single player games” while there are thousand of ways to complete the campaigns and enjoy the custom campaigns done by the modders. Don’t forget it was the Forgotten Empires (a team of modders) who actually help the game stay alive.

[MatCauthon3]

i mean i have things i’m concerned about with these new civs, but frankly sou and his friends are way over the top, acting as if it will take 6 months to even attempt fixes when literally DE was live for like a month before the SL was nerfed.

[SouBotsito]

SP are the guys who have always been more compared to MP, but the difference is that MP has kept the game alive and competitive, without that this game would be just like aoe1, aom and aoe3.

All the positive changes, moddding and tweaks to the game have always been for MP, if you have got UP changes are because of that community, if microsoft wants to sell more they should have focused on SP content like campaigns, unit re skin, idk, but messing with the MP is bad, they did it with the HD with -noob- changes and that divided the community and there is the possibility to repeat that, cause you know history is just a cycle.

And yea the balance changes are going to be every 4 months, in fact there wont be december patch(bug fixing) cause they are delaying everything for the next dlc, to me the game is still unplayable and for several others.

If they can’t even fix the game from previous broken patch, why do you even think they will fix the 2 broken civs after one month, if SL got nerfed was because it was pushed by all streamers/influencers and pro players and it was evident in tournaments, lucky for the devs the world cup was played with the old patch otherwise it would have been a huge disaster.

Microsoft killed the game back at 2006, they can kill this one anytime by removing the server support, the SP community wouldn’t even move a finger for the game, so yeah MP is the most important community for the sake of this game despite the sales.

And just to show you how little they really care for SP community, they promised to keep the support and patches for the HD versions and guess what it was abandoned.

[ArshiaAghaei]

@PilotSpider3216

I was referring to the one year that has already passed and the game is still not fixed…

Well, I guess the game is not fixed for you, because many of the issues of these games were fixed.

Some remain, true, but saying that no support was provided is the typical example of entitled gamers.

@MatCauthon3

I love how you just casually insult the majority of the community and act as if they weren’t here from the beginning.

They have no other backup defense for their claims, as you can see

@SouMexican

MP has kept the game alive and competitive, without that this game would be just like aoe1, aom and aoe3.

@SouMexican

they promised to keep the support and patches for the HD versions and guess what it was abandoned.

That’s literally wrong, they said before launch that HD was gonna be left behind. Idk where you got that

@SouMexican

if SL got nerfed was because it was pushed by all streamers/influencers and pro players and it was evident in tournaments, lucky for the devs the world cup was played with the old patch otherwise it would have been a huge disaster.

You do realize this OP on launch has always been the case for all the DLCs of all the AOE2 versions?

[MatCauthon3]

@ArshiaAghaei

You do realize this OP on launch has always been the case for all the DLCs of all the AOE2 versions?

he brain dumped the 20 years of Huns, Aztecs and Mayans being overpowered civilizations.

[ULTRAMAG5762]

@SouMexican

UT a favor from budda: you can defeat a player from the other team and sacrifice one ally or yourself.

*Buddha

@SouMexican

Australians, they can train wolves and bears, UT poison spiders all archer have trample damage

I’d much prefer Canadians. Their UT Maple Syrup will slowly send all their resources to all enemy teams and will make them resign right after all their resources are depleted with the phrase “We’re sorry”. But don’t piss em off by comparing them to Americans or else they’ll attack you with their dark age UU army of highly intelligent mutant grizzlys than can shoot laser out of their eyes. (much more improved 8K UHD iteration the AOM version)

@Jarazz3343

italians are not just lombards, italy was a collection of city states, which were implemented as a group under the general umbrella “italian”

By that logic a lot of civs will have to be either renamed or split up because they using an umbrella term. I think this is one problem all games with historical factions eventually run into because our histories are so convoluted. Compared to games like RON with all modern nation as factions and CnC with just 3 sci-fi factions and BFMI with 4-5 fantasy factions but only 2 opposing have an edge over historical rts games like AOE.

On that note I am planning to develop a game with every modern racial, religious and political factions. Anyone interested? It will be called Love and Peace.

[bchuprynin]

@ArshiaAghaei

You do realize this OP on launch has always been the case for all the DLCs of all the AOE2 versions?

And why should we repeat the same mistakes then? In my opinion 35 civs are fine, even now some of the civs could be made more unique, interesting and balanced, yet now the devs will spend their time and effort into fixing the Burgundians.

[xWHIT3W0LFx]

@JonOli12

More than 90% of this community has always been SP. SP games are on the rise too, while MP and Esports are last decade’s news.

While I agree with you that the esports aspect of the game is relatively new, they should care for both single- and multiplayers. Especially with the big tournaments this year, the game got the attention it deserves and we singleplayers also profit from that. I’m a true singleplayer and I couldn’t be happier with the fact that we get two new civs and probably more in the future. At the same time I love watching tournaments and competitive play in general. The multiplayer community is one of the reasons why this game got so much love and attention and therefore both communities should be cared about equally.

[Szaladon]

That’s why we’re also getting new civs and campaigns. What’s more exciting for both SP and MP than that.

[ArshiaAghaei]

@bchuprynin

And why should we repeat the same mistakes then?

This is not a mistake, but a simple marketing technique.

@bchuprynin

In my opinion 35 civs are fine

Again, no video game in history has made everyone satisfied. The majority wanted a DLC and they got one

[bchuprynin]

@ArshiaAghaei

This is not a mistake, but a simple marketing technique.

I guess so, but still a bad one, I don’t think that even players who play the OP civs will be satisfied with them.

@ArshiaAghaei

Again, no video game in history has made everyone satisfied. The majority wanted a DLC and they got one

Yeah, I’m not trying to mark my opinion as the only good one, just my thoughts on the matter.