Underused and usless civs

  • Aztecs
  • Berbers
  • Bohemians
  • Britons
  • Bulgarians
  • Burmese
  • Burgundians
  • Byzantines
  • Celts
  • Chinese
  • Cumans
  • Ethiopians
  • Franks
  • Goths
  • Huns
  • Incas
  • Indians
  • Italians
  • Japanese
  • Khmer
  • Koreans
  • Lithuanians
  • Magyars
  • Malay
  • Malians
  • Mayans
  • Mongols
  • Persians
  • Poles
  • Portuguese
  • Saracens
  • Sicilians
  • Slavs
  • Spanish
  • Tatars
  • Teutons
  • Turks
  • Vietnamese
  • Vikings

0 voters

Poor Burmese, the worst civ of all imho.

yeah its really trash, and i hated them always. I dont like a lot RotR civs except from one of the coolest civ: Vietnamese

1 Like

Voted for Slavs since they are the blandest civ of the game I would say

More bland than Portuguese?


i would like they fix portuguese, as a fan of this civilization, we need to get a better portuguese civ.

1 Like

I like the Portuguese UU and techs. The rest of the civ is kinda meh though, except maybe the Feitoria, which is interesting, but either useless or broken.


Yes. Slavs are the farming civ and even its most flavourful thing (their imperial UT) is blander than Arquebus

Burmese might be bad in 1v1 but are quite good in team games where elephants can be used or where they can insta-melt archer armies with their UT. The game balance is solid overall if the “worst” civ is actually good in lots of circumstances.

They have poor answers to archers mid game but have great answers to archers late game. Then they have S-Tier halbs and champions. But every civ has a circumstance they’ll die to, Aztecs vs hussar spam was a discussion on this forum recently but not everyone is calling for Aztecs to be fixed.

Burmese should probably have their UT flipped between castle and imperial age but they aren’t that bad outside 1v1 Arabia IMO.