Give Vikings the Ability to Train Berserks from the Barracks

Replace the UT in imperial or something.

This will give them the character they need insterad of beiing one more archer civ with the ocassional infantry.

No. Berserkers are the best infantry UU, and vikings don’t need a buff

1 Like

And it is a bad rip-off of Anarchy.

1 Like

Also going Berserks is already quite common for Vikings mid Imperial Age (Arbalest is quite often only used for carrying you through early Imperial Age). It’s not like the unit wouldn’t see any use.


wtf, so instead of weakening them to stop their archers, you just make it easier for them to assist their archers with a better unit line? no man

1 Like

As if they didnt train fast enough…

1 Like
  1. This is not a goth only thing, huns have it too
  2. no they dont train fast enough, you need 3-4 castles at least
    3.the power creep of other civs teutons, japanese, aztecs, slavs, burmese has made vikings just another better champion civ. And their champ is inferior to some of those i referenced.

4.Vikings should be hordes of barbarians , with axes. Period

Better give them cobra cars from tcs, so there is no way they can lose now!


that would breack the game very bad.
the huskarle is a lot weacker than a berseker and is almost op when you can produce him in the barraks

2 is usually enough to get started

There is so much wrong with that sentence.

  • Vikings can absolutely keep up with those civs and even are superior to something like Burmese on most maps.
  • None of those civs is defined by their usage of Champions. Some have them as a nice lategame option (like Slavs), while others very rarely use them (like Aztecs - which doesn’t mean their Champions are bad though)
  • Viking Champions are rarely seen because Berserks are so good. After supplies they became at least more cost effective, but people still prefer Berserks, most likely because of the speed. So how are they a “better Champion civ”?
  • Most of those civs haven’t been buffed for quite a while…

that’s very much up for debate. I’d even argue Vikings have one of the strongest Champions (and they still don’t use them because Berserks are so good!!!). They might lose in 1v1 against something like Aztecs. But tankiness is very good for melee units and the anti cav bonus is pretty nice as well.

Huskarls are not weaker (and certainly not a lot weaker) than Berserks and even if they had to be produced from Castles they would be good. The big difference is that Huskarls are a counter to pierce damage, while Berserks are more of an allrounder. So it’s hard to compare them directly.

1 Like

Champs are better choice than Berzerks in every occassion.

The only time you make Berserks is because:
a) you are in castle and have not upgraded swordsmen
b) you are already winning the game and wanna look good while doing so

In any other case better make champions.

To tell you the truth rarely viking players go for infantry right now they are an archer civ with the occasional infantry support

false, berserks can regenerate health, move faster, have more melee armor, and can take even a cavalier on, one on one.
they fair worse against eagles, but better against trash and other infantry as well.

this is true of most infantry civs, because infantry in the game is all about being counter units that are quickly massed up, and less so for being a unit meant to be the core of an army.
eagles are scouts and anti archer/monk units
pikes are anti cavalry units.
champs and most unique units are anti trash/anti eagle/anti huskarl units.
they don’t have the range and ability to micro like archer units, or the mobility and raw power of heavy cavalry.


When you take into account
a) need for Castles (e.g. 1950 stone for 3 castles vs 800 wood for 4 barracks)
b) Costs of upgrading
c)Costs of producing

Resource wise you are just better making champs

And regeneration is not so usefull for infantry, they cant hit and run as good.

Infact i like zerks so much I give them a try often, but each time I just wish I had went the champ route

the only time they are better is in early castle, when you have e.g. a defencive or offencive castle and no upgrades to the militia line

funny, because i routinely see pros use zerks as vikings, it just depends on the matchup.
clearly though you know more then them.


So in a nutshell your opignion is
“dem pros make zerkz”
“zerkz good!”

And of cource you dont specify the occasions. Maybe they are winning? Maybe they are in early castle? maybe its a Team game and they are pocket?

No one makes Champions as Vikings, even if those Champions are REALLY good, because Berzerks are just all-round better.


Do you even play Viking?

as someone who plays vikings alot i would argue that the Chieftain UT makes them a good all around unit which make champions obsolete (better vs eagles) and the most i see is beserks and arbalester since both compliment eatchother

also i think if you have 2 castles and enough ranges plus Siege Workshop it fits no need for beserks from barracks

1 Like

Chieftain boosts champions too…

yes but beserks from castles works the same functionality as champions as champs are more trash/eagle killer

1 Like