Please buy new dlc so devs balance new civs

Please buy them so sellling aim for new dlcs will be complated more early and developers will balance new civs then we will not see broken bohemians and poles in games. Please buy them please.

No, I will buy the dlc to have fun with the newer civs and campaigns not to turn the free patches into paid content with extra steps.


People still don’t get that they make new civs broken on purpose so they are pay to win.
So naive. I won’t buy a single DLC cause the game is literally unplayable right now as this recent patch made the performance a slideshow.
I won the first DLC in a mini event and the second in a giveaway tho

1 Like

The stat’s disagree with you. None of the new civs are in top 5 wins for Tg’s or 1v1’s. Maybe you haven’t learnt to counter them yet as they are newer. But as far as stat’s/the pro’s are concerned, you are not correct in your belief.


Im really curious on what map poles are in your opinion broken @TestedSlinky13 and why? I struggle to see any map where I would be like - let’s pick poles here they are the best or even top 3 :smiley: . Bohemians are such a fun civ - they are clearly made for clowning - that FI monks is so smooth on arena - they are strong civ for sure - but not broken - there are a few maps where they are top tier but also many maps where they are mediocre (nothing wrong with that). So far this sounds like a typical complaint from the plastic leagues.


Stats say bohemians one of the best civ in arena and arena is the second most popular map, stats and tournaments say bohemians and burgundians very comman civs in high rank games and poles very comman civ in general.

1 Like

I can understand why new civs are broken but couple of months passed and still didnt balanced.

Well there are always civs that perform well on certain maps - being one of the best civs on a special type of map should be the norm and not the exception. Poles dont fullfill this criteria otherwise you would see them picked more often in tournaments without the casters freaking out.

Like Spanish are the best Nomad civ - should they be nerfed now? And its not like other civs can’t compete with bohemians on Arena. They are one of the best but not the clear best - while Spanish is clearly the best.

Stats ? This game has too low player to keep stats on track and if we are talking about stats, bohemians are one of the best civ in arena which is very comman map and burgundians are one of the best civ in arabia. Nearly every team game include poles.

where are your cries to nerf franks?

that just isnt true.

  • Nearly every team game include poles.

Well I dont know what maps you play but if I think of civs that are always there it would be:
Brits, Mayans, Franks on open land maps(I feel like brits is in every 2v2, 3v3 on arabia - if its not random civ)
Italians, vikings, Portugese on water maps
Spanish, Persians, Malians, Koreans on Nomad
Lithu, Japanese, Persians, Italians on hybrid maps
Portugese, Bohemians, Spanish, Celts, Aztecs etc on Clown maps

I probably missed half of the civs of my head - but if you want to nerf those civs you probably need to nerf half of the civs 11. And in case of poles probably even more than the half.

AoE II is quite big with ~100k active ladder players - there is a lot of data. - So your saying data is not relevant but your personal small dataset of civs you meet on the ladder is? That’s some next level logic I never thought of.

Please stop supporting predatory game market practices, please. It is cringe.


It is cringe thinking you know more than everyone else & we are all lambs to the slaughter house. Go outside and touch some grass. Everyone benefits from DLC’s, they’d probably close the servers if there wasn’t anymore money coming in and almost everyone loves new content. Grow up.

1 Like

Buying DLC’s encourages this civ clutter and poor management of the game. Not one hair on my head considers giving more money than absolutely necessary to the people who behave like tyrants and block players from having control over maps.

1 Like

Not saying that the cutrent system is good but those people that get banned are the people that dont allow other people that like the map or that dont care about which map they have to play

Idk what is more concerning, the stupidity of this statement or how popular it unfortunately is.

Both players have equal rights to their preferences, the system should match likeminded players of similar skill. Popularity decides availabillity, that is how the world works. Not randomly matching players together who have no interest in playing together and expecting a good outcome.

When someone leaves and you think “selfish” instead of “they aren’t interested and I don’t even want to play someone who isn’t interested” then you are the selfish one.


Let me say it in a better way: people prefer to plsy with a flawed system over having asystem that barely allows to pkay and they arent selfidh for that

What came first, 20 years of having control over maps or DE with their narrowminded system that excludes a significant portion? How can you come and say people need to live by the “rules” when the details of this system weren’t even announced when DE got released? A very convenient thing to say because the status quo apparently suits your needs (which makes no sense because the alternative of max bans/opt-in would better take your preferences into account and help match likeminded players).

Edit: This reply was to a comment from @TungstenBoar which was removed.

So your preferences are niche and therefore you have longer queues, so instead of understanding that that is how the world works you would rather support forcing others to compete on disliked maps? Why not be optimistic and see how matching likeminded players through opt-in/max bans could benefit you a lot?

1 Like

Don’t worry, Sir. I will buy it for my own enjoyment. :clown_face:

1 Like

I like Arabia and I like other maps too. I like the variety but I do think we need ranked lobbies. Im just saying that it is frustrating and dodges screw over people.