Is Bogsveigar Overpriced?

Age of Empires II: DE II - Discussion
1

Bogsveigar was introduced to offset Viking nerfs and approximately compensates for them, while being much more expensive to afford. While the extra cost is justified due to the power of Viking eco, I think the fact that this tech costs gold while Thumb Ring does not, puts Vikings at a 500 gold disadvantage relative to the enemy. In an even game, this could swing the fight as the game goes longer and gold becomes more limited. Vikings already have a limited tech tree, and their trash are also not great, so I don’t think they should be penalized more for it.

For 500 gold, you can make 20 berserks or 11 more arbs. So, is the UT ever worth getting? I always feel like I would rather start tech switching out of arbs (which also usually costs gold) than get the UT. 1 point in favor of the gold cost is the fact that it affects 2 units - arbs and longboats. However, I have never seen a serious Vikings game where both units were relevant. Have you? I think if it costed 500 wood instead of gold, Bogsveigar wouldn’t hurt Vikings as much to get. What are your thoughts on Bogsveigar?

2

The reason for that expensive number is to avoid any abuse with the fast and powerful Vikings eco in the midgame (preventing just massing Archers into fast Imp), I think swapping the food cost to wood will be fine as long is not too cheap.

Honestly isn’t only Bogsveigar, is also Chieftains that is still too expensive, why you want a civ that focus on Infantry when the UT that needs is too expensive? Chieftains should be reverted to the former 400f 400g, and Elite Berserk should also get +1 PA at this point.

And nerf the civs that powercrept them (notably Malay and Portuguese)

4 Likes
3

Not really. The total winrate for vikings currently is 51 percent. If they made any changes to the vikings, they should include forcing the vikings to research hand cart, but for 50 to 75 percent less res.

1 Like
4

In ranked ladder they are performing fine but and cetrainly don’t need another nerf, but in tournaments outside of few water maps, Vikings aren’t seen like circa 2020-2021.

1 Like
5

IMG_2036
IMG_20362160Ă—1620 482 KB

1900+ elo. Also, notice how the rest are all above 50 percent.

6

Asked this ever since the Thumb Ring removal.

Nah. Their regeneration boost is enough to offset the low HP and PA. They are leaning towards melee compared to Champion. I’d rather ask Bogsveigar benefits them.

7

You should get out of your head that resources have different values, all resources stand on the same footing in pro play. Gold is not inherently more valuable, so you are not “at a 500 gold disadvantage”. Gold is more limited on the map BUT your general gold is to win BEFORE gold runs out, most games are won before that so it’s a non-factor.

Uuuuh yes? It’s basically Magyar Recurve Bow but for infantry units… +1 attack is massive for example vs Cavalier or other high PA units. This type of Arbalest complements the Vikings army composition really well, giving them workable units in Berserk, Pikeman, Arbalest and Siege Ram.

Then it would be an auto-pick and Vikings would become just another Arbalest civ, it would be a no-brainer to get this tech.

8

Their arbalest powerspike comes earlier than several archer civs. Besides, they have siege rams.

9

I get the reason for high total cost, but not why it has to be gold. Swapping food cost with wood would actually be a buff since wood gathers faster, while swapping gold cost with wood should in theory be neutral for most of the game since both wood and gold gather at same rate.

Not saying they aren’t performing well on ladder, but they are not really seen in tournaments outside of water maps because their imp tech tree is lacking. They perform well on ladder because they win before they run out of gold, but tournament games tend to go on longer and that is where the gold cost of Bogsveigar becomes significant.

There are plenty of pro level ranked games that go on till they start running low on gold. It is true that Vikings should kill before they run out of gold, but they don’t have to have additional constraints on gold. They are at a 500 gold disadvantage relative to a civ that plays generic arbs because Vikings cannot make as many arbs as a generic arb civ.

How are infantry affected? I am talking about the UT that affects arbs and longboats.

image
image288Ă—545 5.96 KB

It’s not that big. It is a small boost vs most units because thumb ring offsets the DPS lost due to less damage. In any case, if I am up against such kind of units, I would rather spend gold to tech into Berserk + skirm or situationally make more arbs than get the UT.

Can you explain why this would have such a big impact? In theory, wood and gold gather at the same rate so in most cases this would be a side grade. In a few cases, it would help Vikings last a bit longer. Arb upgrade itself costs more than it used to, so I don’t foresee Vikings performing much better than current. I just want the UT to be a real option for a civ that really doesn’t have a lot of options in Imp.

These days a lot of civs can compete with Vikings for Imp timings. I haven’t seen Vikings getting up to Imp that much faster than other S tier civs.

10

Or that we have way too many civ to pick on land and hybrid maps.

1 Like
11

exactly. I don’t think it’s too costly when you are on 100 + vills. But Vikings eco allows to go up way faster - at the cost of having to decide which techs to get.
Very well designed. We still see the Vikings Imp into Arbs with absurd timings all the time, even if they can’t get Bogsveigar initially.

I respect to the current tournament absence of Vikings. I just think they don’t fit the current meta that well. They are “slow and predictable” as Memb would say. At least in the early game. What we see is a clear tendency towards Civs that have bonusses that can be directly converted to military numbers/powers advantages. And Vikings don’t have these. Yes, they have an amazing midgame and the potential for fimp arbs, but before that they are kinda meh.

And there’s to me the question why we want Vikings to see more played on Arabia? I feel they are kinda boring. They can do everything, but nothing good. They just kill with their eco.
I would much rather get civs back on the Arabia meta like… BRITONS

1 Like
12

Technically Viking should have the lead against most of the civs and be able to end the game before this tech becomes necessary. This tech exists for stages where pop efficiency is important. Like its 50+ mins, you have a mixed army and fewer but stronger units are better because they can let the player have a higher number of other units. If you have 40 arbs, instead of 11 more arbs, you can get pop space for 11 more pikes and almost the same damage output as having 11 extra arbs.

13

Bogsveigar (at 600.f 500g) does not feel overpriced compared to the regular arbalester upgrade (at 450f 400g ). UT are usually more expensive than the regular techs, as they add up.

Bogsveigar is always worth it on water maps for longboats. For arbalesters, it gives a +33% power against skirms, +25% against paladins/7PA units, and + 20% against cavaliers/hussars. So it is worth it compared to 10 arbalesters as soon as you already have 30 to 40 of them, which you should have most of the time.

In team games late game, any tech is worth it as long as you make the unit, even the unpopular elite geonese crossbow upgrade.

On the other side, it should never be a problem to make an UT cheaper or more expensive (i.e. more worth it or less worth it) depending on how well the civ is going in terms if win rates or pick rates.

16

To clarify my point, I agree with the total resource cost, but not the need for the cost to be gold. I think the gold cost puts too much of a timer unnecessarily on Vikings who already have a poor Imp tech tree. I don’t see how changing the gold cost to wood could make them any faster than current.

True, but other civs now compete with that timing while having better tech trees. So, Vikings are no longer special. I just want Bogsveigar to be a real option for Vikings without having to forgo future tech switches. Right now, chemistry costs gold for +1 attack, arb upgrade more gold for +1 attack and then Vikings have this UT which costs even more gold for +1 attack.

I agree with this, but I fear even with their old team bonus Britons would still not go much higher than they already are. The problem is other civs have power crept them.

I think it is overpriced, particularly in terms of gold relative to Thumb Ring (which does not cost gold) which this tech roughly compensates for in terms of overall DPS. I used to see AM players skip/delay arb upgrade in tournaments with other archer civs as +1 attack wasn’t worth it.

Against all these units, isn’t it better to just switch to berserk + skirms when you see them than to get this UT?

Not suggesting it should be cheaper in terms of total resource cost, just in terms of gold.

2 Likes
17

I think wood is generally cheaper than gold because you usually have to go outside to grab the 2nd gold mine during imperial age (because your first 7 gold pile runs out), which makes the gold miner sometimes at risk.

Wood is usually cheapest, but for Viking food is also surprisingly cheap after mid castle age

18

True, but on the other hand, wood gets used up making farms and buildings and cutting wood risks opening wood lines, creating openings for the enemy to raid your base.

So, I would say wood is about equal cost to gold.

19

Just let them have free wheelbarrow only, not free handcart. And give them Thumb Ring back. Then there would be no need for Bogsveigar to compensate, they could have a more interesting unique tech instead.

1 Like
20

If you compare it to TR, then yes it looks overpriced.

It doesnt necessarily mean that the cost has to be decreased. Not every tech in the game sgould have the same value for its price (just like bloodlines vs hussar). Abs the good thing about UT is that you can make them specificaly overpriced or underpriced to balance the civ. Vikings lost TR for balance purpose, to mitigate their strength in mid castle age to early imperial age.

Yes, because it is very expensive upon imperial, since you already take bracers and chemistry before it. If they do nit tech switch out of arbalesters, they should still research it a few minutes later, as soon as they can afford it.
For whatever reason, it has been decided that the archers play and knights play should have the same strength on the map & setting where archers are at their strongest (1v1 Arabia)

Bosveigar should be researched even later than that, also as soon ad you can afford it.

Switching to berzerks may be too expensive and time consuming, as you may not have researched any infantry armor upgrade. You can add some skirms , but you should usually not switch to it because skirms are bad against every other unit that the opponent may switch to, while your arbalester push should keep the momentum and threaten any army.
You can add rams or mangonels as well. But if your arbalesters are able to pierce through skirms, then I would rather stay on arbalesters than switching to skirms or berzerkers, as long as I have gold (map control).

If I am on the back foot, then against skirms I would not stay on arbalesters and research bosveigar.

Why ? Are you afraid of lacking gold in the late game ? Would 600.f 1000w be better for you than 600.f 500.g ? I suppose that the high cost has some balance purpose, while taking into account Vikings’ top tier economy.

As said, for me the actual price of UTs/UUs do not need to align with other techs/units, and should rather be set to balance the civ according to win rates and play rates.

And apparently, Vikings were too strong as a fast imperial into arbalesters play, and they lost TR to mitigate that. The Bosveigar price + castle requirement represents the amount if time the TR equivalent tech should be delayed for Vikings to be on a satisfying spot balance wise.

21

Why nerf vikings eco?

1 Like
22

Free wheelbarrow already puts their economy miles ahead. Free hand cart is too much. It’s not just the cost savings, it’s the fact that it kicks in instantly as soon as they hit imperial age with zero research time. That was one of the reasons why thumb ring was nerfed in the first place, because the power spike of arbalest with free hand cart economy behind it in early imperial made the snowball too strong. Without hand cart but with thumb ring added back in, it’s still a really strong power spike.

1 Like