Just ran into a player who said he played Goths 28 times in a row today

I was considering if I should auto resign as soon as I saw goths but decided not to because it was on Arabia which is the best map. Thanks DE for hidden civs and broken Goths.

Also he tried to give me tips on how to defend against them. I told him I dont want tips from a noob who came into my rank by playing goths 28 times in a row. Cant wait for the nerf so he can go back to his proper elo.


I auto resign when I see Franks, because I never ever ever had fun playing versus cheap castles castledropped in my face and loads of stat boosted knights with no real counters. No one can firce me to play vs franks. I just type “no franks” then resign. Just auto resign IMO.

1 Like

lol thats funny I just lost with Franks vs Khemer (obviously I went random civ)

Resigning immediately is the only sane thing you can do.

1 Like

Cant take this seriously… again.


you sound like a real joy to play…


Indeed he does…sounds like a disaster 11.

Anyway; it’s pretty easy to defend against. Seriously. If you see Goths, you know they’re extremely dangerous in Dark Age. Scout them. If they’re going aggression, loom+wall early, and go up to fuedal as soon as possible. Go straight into archers, and counter them. Prevent damage until you can defend (even 3 archers is enough to stop the attack if you’re walled), and he’s delayed himself uselessly. Hold and boom to Castle. Siege in castle with crossbow/spear backing it up in case they switch to Knights. If you prevent a castle from going up, it’s GG - they have nothing useful to defend against you with.

They’ve already delayed themselves by doing the drush, even though it’s less than other players due to the cheap militia. Just take advantage of that weakness.


Part of the problem are people that defend a limited and unfair system and unbalanced civ changes, these people also tend to be hypocrites because they don’t think we should have controll over maps, but they do think its fine that others are forced to play vs those who pick one civ all day.

This devide in the community is fabricated by DE and will keep causing conflict until it is fixed.


I’m a little confused. A limited and unfair system? How so?

The fact you can’t pick maps forces you to adapt your civ choices. Goths is not going to work on Islands (really sad that’s gone). Also not Arena. Even Hideout makes it difficult. A drush won’t work effectively.

I think it’s better to take away map choice then civ choice. It lets people play to the playstyle they enjoy more. If they don’t learn the maps and what civs work best, though, then they’re going to be in a worse position as well as end up being a less skilled and well rounded player.

The whole purpose of Age is strategy. Picking your civ is A MASSIVE part of strategy, knowing what civs to pick in different situations. IMO random civ is a massive disadvantage strategically speaking. If you want to do it for fun, sure, but the system they have now is the best for competitive play IMO. It also takes away so much of the experience. I don’t know of any game that forces you into having a random character for competitive play. That would be unbalanced, unreasonable, ridiculous even.

The fact of the matter with the Goths is that the drush still puts you behind economically drastically. 5 Militia is trickier to defend against than 3, yes, but it’s still relatively easy to defend against if you scout it. Same with 10 Militia. If you counter it successfully you’ve delayed the Goths by a huge amount, and you have the advantage going into Castle Age.


First off Goths could work on Islands if you transport in dark age. There is a small chance that he will scout you since the island is pretty big he would have to get lucky to notice before the barracks are up and a few militia are out after that there is no chance to vil fight and wall the barracks.

And I am sorry to hear that. I think they should keep islands even though I had to waste one of my bans on it. I am all for giving the players what they want. Thats why I wish you could ban as many as you want.

Well civ choice isnt being taken away. Just hiding your civ should be taken away. Basically I just want what we had back. If my opponent wants to pick a top tier OP civ fine, just let me know so I can pick a civ that has a good shot at beating them and not go random civ and end up with some civ that should theoretically lose.

This is exactly why civs should not be hidden. You can’t know what to do in a situation if the situation is not visible to you until its too late. Also going random helps train you to come up with strategies on the spot because when you pick a civ you already a strategy in mind. Usually a meta strategy probably even something that you memorized and learned from a pro player. When you go random you are forced to come up with a strategy on the spot. You spend the dark age thinking about possible strats, the risks they have, what you need to execute that plan and the best counter your opponent could do and what your response to that would be. Its so much more exciting than memorizing a build order for Mayans and always doing the same thing.
But also if you want to master every civ so you are picking a civ for training purposes then there is even more reason for me to see what civ you picked so that I can throw the hardest counters at you to help you get better with that. You shouldnt be getting an easy game for picking a civ.

Well, If you are up against Goths you probably wanna try to go up with like 20-22 vils before he gets like 10 militia in your base and you are still in dark age and yes I havent seen anyone just make 5 and stop, the meta seems to be what viper is doing basically just Hoanging it. You are gonna have to wall your base and then reinforce your walls with houses and more walls. And then make an archery range ASAP. If you are not dead by the time you are feudal with archers out. You probably had at least 2-3 min of combined idle time from your vils wasted on walling plus loom and feudal research means Goths is a head 6.2 villagers even if you didn’t lose a single vil and finally the cost of the wood for walls, houses and repairs. Goths set themselves up for a super strong eco to go castle with while your main focus is to try to get rid of their MAA in your base especially if Goths makes a few skrims and keeps applying pressure. So yeah its not as easy as you think to go FC while you are getting Hoanged by Goths.

1 Like

Well he said don’t wall, walling your base is actually a mistake. So thats when I told him I don’t want tips from a noob. If you don’t wall against Goths I have no idea what you can do. I guess we will never know what he was gonna say to do instead.

you summed up why they should be hidden above per your own actions in HD before reversing course.


If you take away hidden civ, there’ll be something else to complain about. Say I pick goths, you see and swap to a goth counter, then I see your civ and try swap to a counter. Then we keep swapping until the countdown timer runs out and one of us is stuck with a civ we didn’t want to play as - possibly. Then we complain about this new civ swapping at the last minute meta.


agreed! but regardless of what happens, someone will complain

i dont understand if there are so many issues with ranked, then why dont these guys play unranked, then they get what they wanted… they play the maps they want, using the civs they want( random), vs the opponents they want…

yep, he even said this is how he used to do it and then said oh that wasn’t done.

Stop being so confident about things you know nothing about, you’re a new player since DE so you lack any perspective on how the game was before.

Stats will tell you that the majority of players are now unable to continue their playstyle (have controll over maps and if vs civ picker or not), and you have the nerves to banish them to a lobby system that does not even allow them to see elo and achieve fair matches. Somehow DE gets to ignore the past and redefine how online play works, while the devs have very little online experience or skill.


To be fair besides maybe Goth vs Mayan and some rare extreme matchups like that, I don’t think there are civ that 100% counter some other, to the point you can counter-pick forever. I might be mistaken, but then it would mostly matter at higher levels, where there is a higher chance that players will come to an agreement and not counter-pick just for the sake of taking 0 risk. A bit like people agree to not lame, or use Goths in HC3.

1 Like

I’m interested in a system that will allow the freedom and controll of a lobby while having the MM benefit of being automated. Look at my topic here to see what I suggest;

It will explain my stance on civs and forced map pools.

I think it’s better to take away map choice then civ choice.

You are creating a false dilemma, there can be freedom in both choices as long as both parties agree.

IMO random civ is a massive disadvantage

Obviously, to be in an advantage is not the reason why people play random. Most do it to keep the game fresh, to learn all the civs equally and not have to choose each time. After a while some civs will be seen as meta so they will be highly prevelant across certain maps, this could lead to stale situations.

I don’t know of any game that forces you into having a random character for competitive play.

Idk who is saying that, but not me. Please read carefully.

1 Like

Yeah we used to play with civs being shown so we would just go random 99% of the time. Then like 1 out of 100 games someone wants to pick a civ then either their elo is way lower than yours so you go random or you pick the counter to that civ or whatever you want to play with and they are either okay with that or there wont even be a game. Also in the old age u could stop the timer if u are not ready .

not how you said before what you’d do but even so that exactly why its hidden. SO people can pick the civs they want and deal with the matchup.