You are forgetting Koreans and Byzantines also having strong navies.
The Sicilian navy tech tree is pretty darn good. I myself played Sicilians on a water map, and they get Fast Fire Ship, Galleon, Heavy Demo, and Cannon Galleon…as well as Careening and Dry Dock, as well as Shipwright. The only thing the Sicilians’ lack is Elite Cannon Galleon (which really does not hinder them in any way).
True…the Sicilians are probably not “excellent” in terms of their navy. But I find that them having Shipwright and all the other 3 rock-paper-scissor Warships highest techs available, as well as Bracer, makes the Sicilian navy nothing to scoff at in terms of the late game.
They both have really uncreative and boring unique techs.
I can deal with units being OP (because I know that at the end, they WILL get nerfed), But what really bothers me is how bad, broken and boring those unique techs are… both sicilian and burgundian ones
Flemish Revolution is actually a exciting tech. You can use it to do a “last stand” attempt, if you lost your army and have only villagers remaining, or you can use it to suddenly finish off your opponent when your army is on the verge of victory…the possibilities are many.
First Crusade is also a fun tech: you get free units essentially. Like the Cuman Mercenaries tech. Why is that “boring”? Free units are awesome!
Burgundian Vineyards is a overpowered tech, I must agree. But “boring”? No…quite thecontrary: it is fascinating. Basically the Vietnamese Paper Money on steroids. And free gold is not “boring” when you are in a prolonged game, and are fighting a Trade War. Extra gold should always be welcome.
Scutage is a bit odd, I must say…not really boring, but I would definitely say a bit “plain”. It is a tech that is only useful on team games, so it certainly might be useless on 1v1 and 2v2s…but on 4v4s? Quite the good tech.
Interesting you say that…because the Burgundians I think are the weakest in their Archery Range list of options: no Arbalesters, no Heavy Cavalry Archer, no Ring Archer Armor (they do get Bracer). The only think that shines is the Hand Cannoneer having higher damage output from the Burgundians’ civ bonus…but again no Ring Archer Armor, so those Hand Cannoneers will not survive easily in a prolonged late-game match.
Besides Archery Range, yes the Burgundians cover all other unit types (including navy) quite well. But I feel that the strong Archer civs and Cavalry Archer civs can ruin a Burgundian player’s day.
We shall see though moving forward if that turns out to be the case.
I don’t like the concept of kamikaze. A tech wich allows you to make flemish militia from tc or barrack would have been so much better. A funny tech wich does not break the game.
Yes it is.
That is boring and OP. They could have been more creative.
I just can’t agree with you. We think totally different.
And paper money is also boring
Burgundians have few options, there is no denying that…
What I meant is that their bonuses work well together, like the cheaper cav upgrades work well with earlier cavalier upgrade. The early eco upgrades too help you boom, and get to paladins earlier, and the gunpowder support them by destroying pikes.
The concept work, and their tech tree was tailored around their bonuses. It’s just their UU that is broken…
I think i like Burgandias more than Sicilians. I like all about this civ except for the unique unit (that we hope that gets balanced soon). I mean, cheapers stables upgrades and castle cavaliers are cool and super interesting, the gold from farms after unique tech seems quite decent. early economic upgrades seems good too. Taking out the unique unit It’s a strong civ but not OP.
Sicilians in the other hand it’s also quite interesting. The donjon gimmick it’s fun. I do like the 50% absorb bonus, that imo it’s the best point on this civ. My problem with Sicilians it’s that TC and Castle building speed bonus seems too OP, specially in nomad maps. This civs seems to be above every other civ in that aspect. Plus the unique tech of gaining 10 military units per TC, it makes me think that this civ it’s a gift for players who like to play fully walled, boom, and getting military advantadge out of nowhere. So, maybe they could nerf the building bonus a bit, or maybe not, my issue with it, it’s that combined with the 50 unique units it’s maybe too much.
Overall I like the new civs. But some aspects from boths seems out of place to me.
It is not essentially a “kamikaze” attack if you queue up villages immediately after the Revolution tech finishes, so that you get vills back working.
Please explain.
Provide some examples then.
“Agree to disagree” is one of my favorite sayings. If you disagree with my views and vice versa, totally fine with me.
Free gold is always a good thing in this game. Is it “boring” when you get free gold that you desperately need, that makes you end up winning a match? Do please explain why free resources is “boring” when resources are the life-blood in winning matches in Age of Empires?
If Devs are going to make hole new civs, them to have “give insta gold” techs shows those are not well maded civs.
I can give u a fun tech for every civ.
Vikings: infantry + atack vs cavalry, berserkers regenerate hp
Teutons: more resistant siege, castles with a lot of range
Franks: Throwing axeman +1 range, stables work faster.
Britons: archers + range, trebs do splash damage.
Bulgarians: knights atack faster, militia + pierce armor
Tatars: light cav +1 armor, trebs +2 range, unlucks flaming camels
Turks: cav archers +20 hp, artillery +2 range
Those are good and fun civ techs
now take a look on the new ones:
Burgundians: converts food to gold, farms make gold (boring) (farms make gold, only that, would have been ok). Convert all vilagers to flemish militia, unlucks flemish militia (this last one, alone, would have been a great tech without the villager thing.)
Sicilians: Gives gold to allies (boring), Spawns 40 Sergeants
I would have liked the new civs to have better designed unique techs… Like the first ones
Even if you take away the “instant gold” techs, Burgundians and Sicilians are still VERY damn good civs. The former gets cheaper-to-upgrade Knights and Light Cavalry, get Flemish Militia as a very useful anti-cavalry spear unit that also holds really well against enemy infantry…
…the latter has a “mini-Teutonic Knight” infantry unit that can not only be mass produced from the Dijon keeps, but can also BUILD more Dijons themselves.
BOTH civs get Bracer, which means they get solid Elite Skirms and Galleons and maximum range and attack on their Castles (and also Dijons for Sicilians). I would say that these civs are pretty well designed, even without the “instant gold” techs. They have strong military options for both of them. Burgundians even have boosted gunpowder units’ attack, which offers an additional gunpowder variant than the usual Turks, Spanish, or Portuguese gunpowder options. Also: besides lacking Ring Archer Armor, both the Burgundians and Sicilians have access to all other Blacksmith techs.
I do not mean for older, original techs. I mean: offer some examples of “not-so-boring” techs that you think Burgundians and Sicilians should have, since you claim that their unique techs are “boring”.
Again, please explain how Burgundians and Sicilians should have “better designed unique techs”? Offer some new ideas to prove your point.
I think a University requirement for Donjon would be too harsh of a nerf.
The Donjons already “nerf” themselves by being 200 Stone cost per Donjon. Stone already is the rarest of resource. Also: to unlock access to the Elite Serjeant upgrade, you NEED to build a 650 Stone castle as Sicilians. You also cannot build Trebuchets to counter enemy Trebs that do attack your Dijons.
It is the same logic with the Bulgarian’s Kreposts: good “mini-castles”, but they lack many of the Castle’s benefits in techs and trebuchet training.
I think the fact they’re now adding the “Burgundians” as a civ is a sign that we’re approaching barrel-scraping territory and they don’t really know what to do. By no stretch of the imagination were they a civilization or some form of unique culture group. I’ve nothing against the new campaigns, or even - at a stretch - adding the Sicilians, but I find it very odd that the duchy (and previously kingdom) of Burgundy and its rulers are somehow being represented as their own civ.
(And yes, I’m aware of the Burgundians as a Frankish tribe, but it’s clearly not there to represent that).
You think that I do not know that? I am asking you to brainstorm techs that would work well for the Burgundians and the Sicilians that are not “boring” according to you.
They are “old” techs because they are not “new” techs anymore…they have been in the game for months, and even for years. That makes them old. And I never said anything to imply that they were “bad” techs. Many of those techs I myself like and think are “good techs”. Please stop twisting what I am saying to be the opposite of what I am saying.
As a historian and a gamer of Age of Empires, I can understand what you mean by the Burgundians not being enough to warrent their own civ. After all…the Franks for 22 years have represented the “Burgundians”. That is why in the Joan of Arc campaign, the Burgundians ARE “Franks”. Because even though the Burgundians were at one time a separate Germanic tribe, distinct from the other Germanic tribe to occupy Romano-Gaul, the Franks, the Franks and Burgundians would merge together as the “French” people that continue to exist today.
Another way of looking at it, is if the AoE2 devs decided to add “Irish” civ into the game, even though the Celts already represent the Scots, Irish, Welsh and–to a lesser extent–the Bretons of Brittainy, France and the Galcians of northwestern Spain.
Personally though, I think that it is fine to keep “Burgundians” and “Sicilians” as 2 new civs in AoE2. But I think that the game devs have to quit adding new civs at one point, because there really are no more good excuses for more civs as we already have 37(!) civs. They could add (maybe) the North Mississippian peoples as a “North American medieval civ” with Iroquis warrior as a trainable unit, and maybe the Zulu people of South Africa, but it will really be far-fetched, even for those peoples.
I feel like First Crusade and Flemish Militia are too gimmicky for AoEII. They’re too out of place. I’ve seen those two techs completely ruin otherwise highly competitive games. I can’t imagine those civs will be allowed in tournaments. Just a cheap way to win a game for anyone.
The Sicilians do get Bracer, but not Ring Archer Armor. So their Arbalesters and Elite Skirms are the best they can currently be for range and attack, but not so for defense.
And the lack of Paladin upgrade does not let the Sicilians done, because they still get Bloodlines Cavaliers, with all Barding Armor upgrades, and up to Blast Furnace. AND on top of that, their Cavaliers will be better at resisting enemy pikes/halberdiers due to the Sicilians anti-reduction civ bonus.
(And to be honest: Paladins for Sicilians would be kinda broken)
