First I know this is a controversial theme.
And I may sound arrogant by claiming this - and a lot of these civs are really “classic” civs that are beloved by people also because they are overloaded with bonusses.
And yes I intentionally be a bit arrogant here cause I want that topic to be discussed. Cause maybe someone has an idea to solve that legacy issue differently.
But we live in a world with 42 civs and a lot of the civs since DE came out have really awkward bonusses and techs. Cumans double TC, Flemish Revolution, Sicilians. Szlachta Privileges 2 new civs with no knights and no usable replacement.
I think we are at a state where some of the older civs need to be stripped of some of their bonusses to make them free for newer ones. Ofc it’s not always a good idea to just take away a bonus, sometimes civs need compensation for that.
Feel free to correct me or add your own civs that you feel have too many different bonusses which could be used to give new civs an identity without the need of adding gimmicky features which don’t really fit the game.
A) Franks. Franks have the best Palas (or at least one of the best). But they also have a good eco, one of the best knight rushes, super cheap castles and a UU that destroys the main counter of their cav. In my opinion Franks could be stripped of the berry bonus and potentially even the castle bonus in exchange for making their cav even stronger, re-establishing the franks cav superiority from before.
B) Mayans. Mayans have the chepest Archers, a super strong eco (on open maps), Super Eagles, a super strong UU and even cheaper walls. I think there are multiple ways to adress them. One way would be to change their eco, one other to take away the super eagles or a third could also be to make their archers cost standard and give that bonus to a new archer civ.
C) Berbers. Berbers have Super Cheap Cav and Camels. But they also have Camel Archers and the Genitour. First the Genitour shouldn’t belong to Berbers in the first place. ANd they don’t even need it. Second with the Camel Archers + Kasbah they don’t need cheaper Camels aswell… The cheaper knights are enough. In the exchange I would probably buff their scrush by reducing their cost by 10 % in feudal.
D) Mongols. Mongols have a super scrush, really strong CA (UU) and ferrari siege. I think the ferrari siege is a bit too much here. Imo if they just have solid FU siege they are already a very strong lategame civ. The UT could instead do something with the SL to give an alternative to the CA play and make the civ less one-dimensional therefore.
E) Malians. It’s actually only about their longer lasting gold they received. Imo they should instead get something for their infantry directly. This bonus is actually better for a versatile civ that doesn’t plays infantry as a main option like byzantines, gurjaras, Saracens…
Now feel free to trash me. Mabe I deserve it for being so arrogant to claim this . But it’s just my honest opinion, even on a more “meta” level. I think these civs being so overloaded with bonusses from that legacy make it really hard to create new civs that aren’t “gimmicky”. Not only because they “occupy” these bonusses…