Why AoE2 is boring

I have some question:
• Why people who is full wall at 7 min isn’t punished economically?
• Why wall cost 2 wood and are so fast to build? (6s)
• Why couman can boom at 8 min?
• Why Azt, Maya, Khmer, Cumans have too strong economy?
• Why Azt and Maya have very good economy and eagle low cost?
• Why Briton have faster range, while he have +1 range in them archer?
• Why elephant can be create 6s before a knight? with more damage and AoE damage? with more life? with more damage vs building and stone defense? with low time to upgrade and low cost? (in comparison with paladin)
• Why elephant have less upgrade than m@@? (Need 3 upgrades: bloodlines, husbandry and blacksmith cavalry)
• Why Turk is so weak?

So many question without reply…


It depends on the players that can both manage his eco and still able to wall

Because you need a quick way to protect yourself from assaults, stone walls cost more and the stone is needed for TCs and Castles.

They have their second TC as bonus and yes i a clear advantage early but is a disadvantage if you don’t know how to use it properly, and Cumasn are weaker at late games to balance it.

Not having cavalry calls to have a much stronger bonuses for the early game. Cumans paid that with no stone walls and the weakest towers.

English archers were famous for their skills and their bows, so having strong archer bonuses makes sense.

Because Elephants are much slower and take more damage from pikes than knights and their stats vs buildings are needed as Siege replacement, Knights are faster which acan destroy archers fast and attack faster, upgrading to paladin is quite hard in 1v1 but viable in teamgames where mobility is a must.

Not having good trash is a huge punishment but still they have quite strong units like the Jannisary, Bombard Cannon and Hand cannon, also they have the strongest Cavalry archer and free Light Cavalry and Hussar upgrades, this is a civ meant to be played in closed maps and reach castle and imperial age fast as possible, still they need a buff.


Hi, @EeryClient14071!
I think that the topic somehow doesn’t correspond to what you started discussing. I think that Age is not boring, if you play it differently every time. And there are ways to do so.
Regarding your particular remarks, I think that you forget the other side of the medal. Each of these have a downside, like cost. Like being strong in one situation, map or civ pick, but totally weak in another. You could say something like that for any civilization. Like: why can Goths spam champions like it’s nobody’s business? Right, it is way more frustrating than Britons archer range, but we all know how much you have to grind for that sweet, sweet Infantry flood…
This is the beauty of the game and this is why it doesn’t get boring, in my opinion. The combinations of counter options is equally impressive and interesting to apply. :wink:
Keep on trying and discovering!

1 Like

Agreed on the walling meta! feels like going m@a + towers every game to spice things up

There are languages were “boring” and “annoying” use the same word, so I guess it’s where the confusion comes from.

fullwalling isn’t punished economically because the maps suck

if you play on better maps, then spending resources on walls means you can’t spend resources on something else (like docks / fishboats), which will put you behind both militarily and economically

it looks like OP pick turks against elephant civ and meso american civ and got rekt. looking to nerf elephants and egos.

To answer all your questions in detail, it is going to be at least 20 page long explanation involving mostly arithmetic deductions but to simply make a point why are things as they are I have tried to show that your questions are not very sensible in the following answers:

  1. • Why people who is full wall at 7 min isn’t punished economically ?
    Answer: Try 2 players of same skill level play against each other, A full walling at 7 mins, B not going for full walling. According to your question, full walling player wins everytime, which is certainly not the case.

  2. • Why wall cost 2 wood and are so fast to build? (6s)
    Answer: Straight answer is to balance things. Walling costs some time and some wood resources. If walling required more time and more wood resources, it wouldn’t likely be a viable strategy. If you think, waller wins every game, then you can walling and see if you can win every single game, which I highly doubt. Anyways, if you do not like the option of walling, you can try your hands on no-wall mods.

  3. • Why couman can boom at 8 min ?
    Answer: To answer your question regarding this, I would suggest you watch Spirit of the Law YouTube Video where he explains very well in detail about Cumans ability to double TC at Feudal Age vs Other civs and what strategies might be viable related to it. Again, if you think Cumans have the advantage because they can double TC at Feudal then you can try playing with Cumans and see if you can win every game, which is not the case.

  4. • Why Azt, Maya, Khmer, Cumans have too strong economy ?
    Again, try playing with these civs against other civs and see if you can win every game. I might sound repitive but my point is AOE2 revolves around strategies with different civs, different units, timing etc., so if you think one thing had a clear advantage then why don’t you try to take that “advantage” and win every game, the answer is your viewpoint that there is such unfair advantage is based on ignorance rather. (I am not trying to bash, just saying your claims aren’t true in every question)

I was going to answer all your questions but I find it that it will be more helpful to you if you tried practicing more. I suggest you understand 1 civ at a time and finds its strengths and weaknesses. Also, you can watch high rated game live on twitch or competitive games on YouTube to have a better understanding.
I have been playing AOE2 for a long time. It is the most fabulous RTS game.


This thread is encompassing points from multiple threads that have 100s of replies already on this forum. I’d suggest taking a look at those to gain a better understanding. Bottom line though is, AOE2 is not boring :blush:


it actually takes away from your economy to wall, as the real price to pay for walling is in the lost resource gathering time.

because one tile of wall doesn’t block much.

every race can do this, Cumans cant exactly do this safely and it requires them sitting in feudal age with feudal units defending against Castle Age army. furthermore Cuman is actually under-performing a little bit so its not like they are a strong civ.

Aztecs and Mayans don’t have a lot of military Options, and many believe all 3 should be nerfed.

because they don’t have cavalry?

Different civilizations are different, Britons lack thumb ring so they will never have 100% accuracy, and they fire slower too.

Elephants also cost more, are slower, there aoe damage is largely mitigated by armor, there bonus damage vs buildings doesn’t much matter in the grand scheme of things because you usually use siege weapons for those.

two different units that perform two different roles, i could easily ask why m@a don’t take bonus damage from any trash units with your logic.

Turks is a very hard civ to buff without breaking them. there are weaker civs out there then turks as well.

your thread title is also extremely misleading. you say AoE2 is boring and then ask a bunch of questions that pertain to balance but has nothing to do with the game being boring.


The answer to most questions is ‘because of balance’. Every civ have something they excell in and also some weaknesses. Depending on the current meta, the overall balance seems pretty good. There are some points of attentions, but overall not really much to complain about.

I do agree walling is currently to strong. It makes feudal fight neglictable on most maps. Personally i see some nerf to walling. You might increase the cost, you might increase building time, you can limit their armor, … Enough possibilities.

1 Like

Palisade Wall

Wall costs 5 stone

That’s what you need to do in order to not get rushed

Also, you need to have a proper wood eco to be able to fully wall

Because it’s a civ bonus

They really don’t have too strong eco
Their eco is decent

The only actual issue with AOE2 is that Turks are very weak in most maps

Because it’s an Archer civ, it has to have better archers

Because it’s a way stronger unit than m@@

Why does the sun go on shining?
Why does the sea rush to shore?


2 players with same level skill, if player A wall and else player don’t wall, player A have advantage to be protected, in contrary else player, Here is any nuance, the economy different is too weak for strong protection,. We can compare with scout rush, who is in better position ? Player wall or not ? There is diffrence in economy between both player ?

The walling isn’t strategy but the meta. We need to nerf this, too many people was wall from 7 min IG, it is not normal that player was not punished economically.

A cuman which allows itself to boom from feodal age have strong advantage economically, don’t forget he can wall also and he have better wall. U can see the game of pro, the defeat on a titanic, the player who play cuman have better advantage without titanic.

It is not my practice the problem, i think u don’t see or play many games with u don’t see this problem : same civ played, same strategy in majority, many time people play arena in arabia.
But i don’t understand, the other civ ? There is not problem with ? It’s strange… The player pro say the best civs is chinese, azt, etc. Because they have great economy and good army, but there is no probleme maybe ? Other civ were balanced.

And spoil alert : thess civ can have good bonus without be too strong, example : Britons can have +1 range, there is no problem, but if it have faster archery camp it is too strong, and ethiopian has good civ balance with archer attack faster, without too many advantage. There is difference with identity of the civ and too lany advantage.

Oh yes, it is logic that elephant was stronger knight and ram in more fast! Fortunately the elephant was slower than archers, not bonus with khmer haha!


I hope u can understanding me with my english.

We don’t need delete all these advantages, we can nerf to balance the game.

1 Like

yes, let’s nerf a civ like Cumans, who doesn’t see much use in tournaments, and who is sitting around sub 50% winrate on ladder. they clearly are op and have too many advantages.

1 Like

How to defend against Aztecs/Goths MAA if wall is not a good option? Other civs cannot reasonably outnumber their MAA due to their extra starting gold and cheaper militia for Goths.

Change about walling also hugely affect the overall balance of the game. It can be significant buff for early aggression civ like Aztecs/Goths/Franks/Huns or Mongols. Most of them are already top-tier civ.
Change something that can change overall balance of game should be careful. Arabia become more open in the last patch and it is enough I think. Or suggest more aggressive map to include in the map pool, which is not reasonably wallable like Serengeti or Kilimanjaro would be good.

archers are always a good option.

Archers cannot immediately trained when reaching Feudal. Have to build Archery Range and mine gold. MAA is upgrade immediately from Militia after reaching feudal and no extra gold is needed for 3 MAA for Goths/Aztecs and only extra 30~40gold can make 5 MAA.
Walls are necessary to defend against them in early feudal when archers are not trained yet.

1 Like

l think when someone talks about AOE2 or any such game in such drastic words “AOE2 is boring”, consider this: This is 20 year old game that is increasing in popularity than ever before. If you think its boring learn it well.

For a person playing and enjoying this game for 10 or 15 or even 20 years your statement especially, the title, is ridiculous.

I do understand your concerns. I recommend watch some expert games on youtube or some other streaming site. Helps! There is so much to the game. I am still learning after 15 years of playing it :slightly_smiling_face: