The News Civs aren't broken

The new civs aren’t broken. You feel they are broken, but nothing I’ve read so far justify the broken, like what would be the Cumans step lancers on DE release.

They’re is some defined and known areas were they are indeed strong. And if so it’s confirmed by the stats, some nerfs will probably be addressed.

But you should learn the difference between the “stats show they are broken” and “damn it’s a lot of new play style, and I am not that good at the game, and I lose, so it must be broken! Not my fault!”.

And so far, the expac released yesterday. We don’t have the stats.

Also if you bring the argument with such terrible generality, aka “BURGUNDIANS ARE BROKEN! COUSTILLIERS ONE SHOT MY PALADINS!” Then the coustilliers are your problems, not necessarily the civ.

And again, it’s a “you’re thinking that”. It’s biased. It’s not statistics, it’s not necessarily reality.

Here some counter and biased arguments from me, to show you how ridiculous this way of thinking is :

  • I managed to handle and win the all-in Burgundian with the flemish militia. Does that mean it’s useless? Was the player I played against worst than I? See, many questions and no responses.

  • I managed to deal with Coustilliers by forcing them to fight, and deal their charged attack to useless trash units. Does it mean Coustilliers aren’t that strong since, under pressure, it’s a bad unit? No, it doesn’t mean that necessarily either.

What we can say for sure is that the new civs brings a lot of new gameplay, and by their Unique Technologies. And I feel like a part of the aoe2 community doesn’t want the game to evolve.

I think it’s sad for a game that successful not bringing new game mechanics, not bringing new updates and reworks.

Keep in mind that, if we keep the good ol’ design, new civs are likely to be very similars, and game designs will not be that exciting.

New patch and new balance means new interest into a game, for a part of players. In the actual steam stats you can clearly see a lot of players coming back with new patches.

I hope you will question yourself, and I hope by this post I will change your point of view for a bit, at least.

Actually Sicilians need a buff. Really, what can they do against tower rush?! Or Incas rush?! Just drop 2 towers on them then they are dead, if they want to fight trush they will make Donjons which cost 200 stone and their eco will be so weak

scouts that laugh at spears? knights that laugh at anything anti cavalry?
archers that laugh at skirms?


No, this is not the same, tower rush is not a unit to counter it with unit. It is a full rush with towers which need towers! Fighting with Donjons will make them dead anyway

against a tower rush they should go scouts and stop them from going up. or stop the second one from going up i should say. the first one you counter with a donjon obviously. yeah the tower rush is a great way to slow them down though.

1 Like

And what is it? Do the towers grow themselves out of nowhere? Besides, feudal age towers are fragile af to melee attack.

It is not as you think. It is too easy to make a sneaky towers behind wood lines and front gold camps, not anytime you will see the trush is coming so this is one. Second where is the fair fight to spend 125 for tower and 200 stone to fight against?! This means more vills on stone and more time to build

so scouting is important? dang. welcome to RTS games. also, as a Sicilian player, knowing this is one of your weaknesses, you should be scouting for it.

1 Like

The deal is that steppe lancers (and konniks too) were so OP that they set the bar really high. A unit can be way worse than steppe lancer and still be too good.

Based on the stats Mayan and Aztec would have never been nerfed in DE 11

Let’s take an example for this one. Let’s say that instead of having a feudal age UU and UB, Sicilian had watch towers, and after building your first castle you could get serjeants that could build donjons, would the unit and the building suddenly become boring, or not fun? I don’t think so.

Same for Burgundian, imagine they didn’t have cavalier in castle age. People would still be attracted to them, because who can say no to half cost paladin upgrade?

Depends what you mean by “evolve” Those UTs for instance are clearly from AoE3. Meanwhile I dare you to find someone who is angry (ie. not memeing about dead sarracen+mayan mastapiece) at the
new Mayan UT. Question of game design.

Well after looking into it a bit I can admit it’s partially overblown, since they were careful to try and give all those strong bonuses some downsides. For instance before seeing the unit stats I expected serjants/donjons to have castle age stats in feudal, and they would be weakened only in the nerf patch. They thought to make the coustillier charge not affect buildings, stuff like that. But there is still stuff that is obviously problematic, like first crusade, especially on boomy maps.

Only the Burgundian UU seems brocken.

Also First crusade , that i personally just love, needs some balancing maybe increase cost a bit for each additional TC.

Edit : Reduce it if 1 TC only then add an ammount for each TC!