Vikings, Berserks overhauling

Even current Berserk is better than generic melee units with only small margin like against FU champion. Berserk die to Leitis, Keshik, Aztecs, Japanese, Teutons champions etc. 65 food 35 gold unit would heavily countered by +16 HC (even current +10 even is fine) and softly countered by Cav Archers. Being countered by generic arbalest big no because generic arbalest is so common and all purpose unit and 2/3 of top tier civ’s generic option. My proposed Berserk would die all strong melee units just like before. Now, Berserk will have a higher chance to beat arbalest (not counter btw, arbalest still have chance) and great in raiding (current Berserk is good but it isn’t better than fu Hussar still, new Berserk would cover Viking’s weak cavalry).

Berserk being versatile is good but it is neither enough fast for raiding nor enough strong for countering other strong melee units. Berserk must be near to Hussar in terms of raiding ability because Vikings has no cav option for raiding in late game. 8/10 of the civs has raiding unit. I don’t know a civ that has no raiding unit in the late game. Woad Raider, Shotel Warrior, Huskarl are better than Berserk in terms of raiding. I prefer Woad Raider thousands of time over Berserk. Woad Raider need only elite upgrade + doesn’t need huge tech transition + better in raiding due to 20% more speed (1.38 vs 1.15) because Celts is already infantry civ (Vikings also create pikeman but there is no need make all blacksmith upgrade to use pikeman). Vikings’ late game option very limited. Berserk must be strong to compensate its high upgrade (Vikings normally go archers, thus transition into Vikings require not only most expensive upgrade in the game but also blacksmith upgrades. For instance, Slavs have to make Blacksmith upgrade for Hussars, and Knights. Therefore, transition into Boyar only need castle and elite Boyar upgrade) and carry Vikings in late game.

1 Like

Yeah but you are acting as if Vikings were a civ that easily falls into trash wars when their main late game option is extremely gold efficient and no, most units arent better than Zerks

their main option? you mean their ONLY option besides arbalests?
right, lol. i forgot a relatively ok-ish semi-cheap infantry UU compensates for the fact that their other units suck compared to all other civs, even their navy is underwhelming despite being part of their specialization, compared to some other civs that aren’t even suppose to be navy civs.

viking pikes are trash, viking cavalry is trash, viking siege is trash, viking ranged units are trash and now with the removal of thumbring they are even more trash, but that’s okay because you can spam a decent UU that most other civs can deal with by spamming some archers, which basically everyone does anyway.

1 Like

Totally agree but Vikings need eco nerf before berserk and infantry-line buff. Vikings remain to be best civ in the game with this absurd eco bonus even though it has limited tech tree. For instance, All TC techs is 50% cheaper (including loom, town watch and town patrol) instead of Vikings current eco bonus would be appropriate. After that, infantries +20% from Feudal Age to +25% hp from Dark Age, thumb ring again, Berserk need +1 PA, 1.05 to 1.15 speed, heal regen 20, 40 (after tech) to 30, 60 (after tech) but its cost increase to 65 food 35 gold. Lacking Halberdier isn’t big problem because who need halberdier when there is 88 hp, +5 attack against cavalry Champion.


I will still choose champion over berserk due to the gold cost. Champion is nearly free that you can really spam a lot, and champion got much higher HP.

Its not just “okay”, its prob one of the three best infantry unique units along Obuchs and huskarls

Either way Im fine if they give them +30% hp on barracks units by imperial age


One massive problem though, is since Berserks are the only viable units on the viking roster (besides champions and to a lesser degree arbalests) you need a lot of castles to viably produce a lot of them, which makes viking castles primary targets for any enemy even more so than normally with other civs, because taking out their castle(s) means they can’t produce their one core unit. maybe allowing them to be built in barracks after researching a tech by imperial age like goths can with huskarls would fix a lot of their macro problems.

but i don’t like copying other civ bonuses in general, so eh.

They are created pretty fast and I have seen a decent ammount of Zerk spam in tournies so prob not needed

In theory, Vikings Champion is better than Berserk. Cheaper upgrades, cheaper unit, need no castle (if you lose your castles, you can’t create Berserk but you can add another barracks if you lose your barracks). having more hp which mean that it is more resistant to archers. Berserk’s only advantage over champion is 17% more speed. It doesn’t feel reasonable to go Berserk for just 17% speed.

well i mean to be fair they are better than champions vs. cavalry once chieftans are researched, and they regenerate, so the 17% more speed is not the only thing they got going for them.

Vikings champion also is effected by chieftans. In same cost not 1:1 ratio, Berserk’s only advantage against champion is 17% speed. It is good advantage but it doesn’t worth 80% of the game, going champion is safer approach because Vikings player can fall behind while researching Berserk’s expensive upgrades (simply most expensive unit to upgrade) and Vikings player could lose his castles in remaining of the game. Thus, I proposed to give Berserk, +1 PA, 10% speed buff and more hp regeneration cost of +10 gold cost.

Zerks are better against literally anything that isnt taking archer fire amd they have regen. Theres a reason we never see viking champions while zerks are the go-to Viking unit. And before you say “,zERkS aLsO SuCK” most pros would greatly disagree with you

1 Like

It is true that Pros use Berserk a lot but I think they are in wrong way. In costwise, 13 Champions is equal to 10 Berserks. Can 10 Berserk kill 13 Vikings Champion. I didn’t even consider castle cost + Berserk’s expensive upgrades. It feel champion is better than Berserk. Btw, unique units meant to fulfill distinct job. However, Berserk is simply little better version of champion, it has no identity over champion. It is bad game design already.

Which means berserks are far more population efficient. And it’s far faster to tech into elite berserks then it is to tech into champion. Furthermore I’ll believe you over pros when you can even consider touching pros elo.

Regeneration. Faster speed. Better defense and offense stats. Only thing it’s worse then champs at is health.


Getting FU berserk is 1075 food 475 gold, 45 seconds elite upgrade + 850 food 400 gold 40 seconds = 1925 food 875 gold, 45 seconds if you have this huge amount of resource (1925 food) in one time while champ is 1050 food 450 gold 175 seconds. Main reason of why pros use Berserk probably fast research time. However, I don’t understand why pros use Slavs Cavalier over Boyar. Boyar is stronger than Cavalier in every aspect. Even non-elite Boyar has +2 melee armor over Cavalier. Elite Boyar is beast comparing to generic Slavs Cavalier, +6 melee armor (50-83% melee resistance according to situation) +1 PA (25-33% resistance against arbalest-heavy cav archer), +2 attack, +10 hp Cavalier only advantage is little low gold cost (-5) and 3.7% speed.

Berserk is approximately 30% expensive than champion. +1 attack, +1 melee, hp regen (its strongest stat) doesn’t justify using Berserk enough. 17% simple make Berserk appealing. Btw, my initial statement is true, Berserk is little better version of champion. It doesn’t have separate purpose.

No where did I say fully upgraded. And frankly berserkergang is unnecessary. With just elite berserk you’re good to to. Heck even castle age berserks are better then 2hs.
Also. Champ is 1050 450? What about men at arms + longsword + supplies. Do they not need to research those techs? That’s another 325 food and 180 gold right there.

Those +1 stats are huge when you do the math. A champ with full upgrades will only do 12 damage to a berserk but takes 14 back. That means 5 hits to kill a champ instead of 6. And a berserk takes 7 hits to die. And with vikings it doesn’t matter so much about how cost effective something is because their economy is so insane. Population efficiency is the calling card of the berserk.

More population efficient, and faster. Those are huge advantages. Speed alone is a huge advantage. Not everything has to have a separate completely unique purpose. The mere fact rhat pros prefer berserk over champ tells judt how powerful it is.

Just like your completely busted changes you mentioned earlier for it. All the counters you mentioned for it are basically unique units and infantry that most civs don’t have good champs to counter them with. And throw the viking eco on top of that and your argument is laughable. The mere fact rhat we don’t see a unique unit with that type of power as is should tell you why it wouldn’t work. But then again I’m talking to rhe guy who said teutons should go cavalier against his proposed civ tgat has strong cavaliers then teutons do.

Youre so caught up in cost effective that you ignore the population side of things. You mentioned 13 champs vs 10 berserks but that gives the champs 30% more supply. Imagine what the viking army is doing with 30% free supply.


I just wanted to say, reading the name of the topic kind of annoys me every time I do. It’s meant to be overhauling, not overhouling. Just felt the need to point that out.

1 Like

Oh, cool. You fixed it, thanks.