Age Of Empires 2 Civilization Strengths And Weaknesses
- Age Of Empires 2 Civilization Strengths And Weaknesses Questions
- Age Of Empires 2 Civilization Strengths And Weaknesses List
- Age Of Empires 2 Civilization Strengths And Weaknesses List
Start by learning the basic counters in Age of Empires 2 and you’ll begin making smarter decisions in-game. It’s worth noting that with proper micromanagement an unfavourable fight can still be turned around. However, the counters shown here are accurate for beginners and each unit description will cover any exceptions. In this Age of Empires 2 Vietnamese civilization overview, Resonance22 explains the new Vietnamese civilization strengths and weaknesses. I show gameplay of the new Vietnamese unique unit, the. All Age of Empires Forums Neoseeker Forums » PC Games » Strategy » Age of Empires II: The Conquerors » strength and weaknesses of units strength and weaknesses of units.
» Guides: Scenario Design · Modding · Strategy · Walkthroughs · Game Info · Other · Archives
» FAQs: FAQ Index · Scenario Design FAQ · Modding FAQ · Macintosh FAQ · Playing Online · Abbreviations
» Features: Blacksmith Feature · WiP Spotlight · Community Spotlight
» Contests: Pretty Town Contest · Cinematic Scenario Competition · Continuous Screenshot Competition · Writing Competition
» Featured Mods: Age of Chivalry · Tales of Middle Earth
Published on 12-30-2016; updated on 12-30-2016
Tags: General Info
Age of Empires II: The Age of Kings and The Conquerors Expansion include a variety of civilizations from throughout the entire world. Each civilization gets it's own bonuses, making it unique and more powerful in a certain aspect of the game than others. They also offer team bonuses that are shared in multiplayer settings.
Aztecs
(Expansion-only)Unique Unit: Jaguar Warrior (anti-infantry infantry)
Unique Tech: Garland Wars (+4 infantry attack)
Team Bonus: Relics +33% Gold
- Start with Eagle Warrior, not Scout Cavalry
- Villagers carry +5
- All military units created 15% faster
- Monks +5 HP for each Monastery technology
- Loom free**
Britons
Unique Unit: Longbowman (archer)
Unique Tech: Yeomen (+1 foot archer range; +2 tower attack)
Team Bonus: Archery Ranges 20% faster
- Town Centers cost -50% wood in Castle Age, Imperial Age*
- Foot archers +1 range Castle Age, +1 Imperial Age (for 2+ total)
- Shepherds work 25% faster
* Changed from Age of Kings. (AoK - Town Centers cost -50%)
Comments:
Q) Are the Britons Infantry the best?
A) I've answered it five or six times I think. Yes, British infantry receive all infantry upgrades. To put this in perspective, there are four civs which have infantry equal to the Brits (i.e., all upgrades). Two civs which have special infantry civ advantages, but don't get all upgrades, so it's kind of a toss-up on whether they're 'better'. Finally, two civs have all infantry upgrades AND get special bonuses, so are clearly superior to the British. Of course the remaining four civs are inferior.
However, the bare bones description above miss an important point, which is that all other civs' infantry is inherently inferior to the British because of the British secret weapon -- kick-@$$ archers. 20 British infantry backed up by 10 British archers will handily defeat 30 of any other civs' infantry.
The English get all of the ships and ship techs except for the cannon galleon.
Q) We already know the Britons get the best infantry unit, the Champion. Do they get the best upgrades, all the upgrades?
A) The Britons get all Blacksmith research items.
- ES_Sandyman
Byzantines
Unique Unit: Cataphract (anti-infantry cavalry)
Unique Tech: Logistica (Cataphracts cause trample damage)
Team Bonus: Monks +50% heal speed*
- Buildings +10% HPs Dark Age, +20% Feudal Age, +30% Castle Age, +40% Imperial Age
- Camels, Skirmishers, Pikemen, Halberdiers* costs -25%
- Fire ships +20% attack
- Advance to Imperial Age costs -33%
- Town Watch free**
** 1.0c patch only
Comments:
Q) Most people don't build monks with short ranges, they don't work against siege, people aim for them with cavalry, and suck in battle when trying to convert or heal.
A) If people don't want to build monks, so? The Byzantine healing bonus is not the reason people choose the civ. People aim for monks with cavalry because they're scared, not because monks are weak. If you fear losing monks, group them in a defensive formation such as a box, with troops surrounding them (such as paladins, or teutonic knights).
Q) So what is the range of a monks healing, and if a unit is hurt right by it, does it start to heal it?
A) Not very far, and yes, monks auto-heal injured units they see nearby. Including those guardian troops on the outside of the box formation protecting the monks.
- ES_Sandyman
Celts
Unique Unit: Woad Raider (fast infantry)
Unique Tech: Furor Celtica (+50% HP Siege Workshop Units)
Team Bonus: Siege Workshops 20% faster
- Infantry move 15% faster
- Lumberjacks work 15% faster
- Siege weapons fire 20% faster
- Sheep not converted in in 1 Celt unit's LOS
Comments:
Celt infantry speed bonus may not seem like much at first. But consider it means the following amazingly useful things: Celtic infantry are much harder to hit by ranged shots lacking ballistics (example: all enemy siege). Even shots with ballistics can be dodged more easily. Celtic infantry are less vulnerable to missile troops, because they spend less time charging up to the archers. Plus they can actually run down the archers. Celtic pikemen are harder to ignore by cavalry, because they are so quick the cavalry can't just dodge around them. You can run away from enemy footmen and they can't catch you. Excellent for raiding. Most civs, once they send a troop of infantry into the enemy town to cause trouble, have to write off the attack force. The Celts can actually retrieve them and use them again, later on. When other civs research Squires, their normal infantry will thereafter be as speedy as the Celt normal infantry. However, the Celts can retain their speed advantage if they go for woad raiders, fastest footmen in the game.
Celts get all siege weapons and upgrades except the dreaded bombard cannon. They are one of only four civs to get the siege onager, the only weapon in Age of Kings that can destroy trees. Plus, their siege weapons attack more quickly, which means that a Celtic ram, for instance, gets in 20 percent more blows before it's knocked out. It means that your onagers usually get one more parting shot before being KOed by enemy archers. And it means that you almost invariably win trebuchet duels. You need the siege weapons, too, because of your archery and armor weakness. Who needs archers when you have fast-firing heavy scorpions? Emphasize siege - you'll be glad you did.
- ES_Sandyman @ GameSpot Showcase
Chinese
Unique Unit: Chu Ko Nu (fast-firing crossbowman)
Unique Tech: Rocketry (+2 Chu Ko Nu pierce attack, +4 scorpions)
Team Bonus: Farms +45 food
- Start +3 villagers but -200 food, -50 wood * **
- Technologies cost -10% Feudal Age, -15% Castle Age, -20% Imperial Age
- Town Centers support 10 population
- Demolition ships +50% HPs
**Changed in 1.0c patch. (Expansion - Start +3 villagers but -150 food, -50 wood)
Comments:
Last Saturday I got my behind totally kicked by a newbie player who used chu-ko-nu to slaughter me. He built a castle in my town, so I naturally sent my mighty warriors to kill it. Lo and behold a stream of arrows issued from the castle like unto a firehose, causing my dudes to pretty much drop in their tracks. 'Yow!' I thought. 'Twenty dead woad raiders in 20 seconds! What the heck does he _have_ in those castles?' So I naturally pumped out some battering rams to knock down the offending obstruction. Even the mighty shower of arrows from the castles (which I'd realized held 20 enemy archers of some sort) couldn't stop a ram, after all. Well, the ram got closer, closer, and suddenly 20 chu-ko-nu popped out of the castle and started shooting at the ram. 'Ha!' I thought. 'That ram has 180 points of piercing armor. Those stupid chu-ko-nu will do only minimum damage.' Turns out that the chu-ko-nu DID only minimum damage -- one point for *each* arrow they fire.
My wonderful rams melted like candles in a Texas summertime, and I learned the horrible truth about the chu-ko-nu -- when used in numbers, they are devastating against units that are supposedly 'strong' against archers. The reason is simple -- such units typically have strong piercing armor. But Chu-ko-nu, with their bonus attacks, do so much more damage to such units that they really don't suffer from the usual handicap.
So, while chu-ko-nu may get killed by longbowmen and throwing axemen, they sure seem to do a number on skirmishers, light cavalry, siege, buildings, and boats.
- ES_Sandyman
Franks
Unique Unit: Throwing Axeman (ranged infantry)
Unique Tech: Bearded Axe (+1 Throwing Axeman range)
Team Bonus: Knights +2 LOS
- Castles cost -25%
- Knights +20% HPs
- Farm upgrades free (requires Mill)
Comments:
So why isn't the Frankish unique unit a knight? Cavalry are already one of the most powerful unit lines in the game. With five horse units already available to the Franks, including the awesome Paladin, it could be overkill to add a super-duper cavalry. Besides, then there would be decision making associated with playing the Franks. As it stands, a Frankish player may choose to upgrade his cavalry or his infantry (or both, if he is lucky). The throwing axmen do add a nice benefit to the cavalry, as the latter lack any ranged weapon. Axemen can take out siege weapons just on the other side of walls, or deal with pesky fire ships or scorpions that can stay just out of cavalry range.
- ES_Deathshimp @ GameSpot Showcase
Age Of Empires 2 Civilization Strengths And Weaknesses Questions
Goths
Unique Unit: Huskarl (anti-archer infantry)
Unique Tech: Anarchy (Create Huskarls at Barracks); Perfusion (Barracks units created 100% faster)
Team Bonus: Barracks 20% faster
- Infantry cost -35% starting in Feudal Age**
- Infantry +1 attack vs. buildings
- Villagers +5 attack vs. wild boar; Hunters carry +15 meat*
- +10 population Imperial Age
**Changed in 1.0c patch. (AoK/Expansion - Infantry cost -10% Feudal Age, -15% Castle Age, -25% Imperial Age)
Huns
Unique Unit: Tarkan (anti-building cavalry)
Unique Tech: Atheism (+100 years Wonder/Relic victory time; -50% Spies/Treason cost)
Team Bonus: Stables 20% faster
- Don't need houses but start -100 wood
- Cavalry Archers cost -25% Castle Age, -30% Imperial Age
- Trebuchets +30% accuracy
Japanese
Unique Unit: Samurai (anti-unique unit infantry)
Unique Tech: Kataparuto (Trebuchets fire, pack/unpack faster)
Team Bonus: Galleys +50% LOS
- Fishing Ships 2X HPs; +2P armor; work rate +5% Dark Age, +10% Feudal Age, +15% Castle Age, +20% Imperial Age
- Mill, Lumber Camp, Mining Camp cost -50%
- Infantry attack 25% faster starting in Feudal Age**
Comments:
I will say again, the Japanese fishing bonus (which would make them unstoppable in ROR) is probably not as good as you are thinking in AOK. If anything, their cheap dropsites make them efficient hunters. They are still not an economic powerhouse like the Chinese, Franks or Persians. Samurai can beat any unique unit, although it will take many of them to fight off a Teutonic Knight or War Elephant. Samurai can still beat a Champion 1 on 1--barely. It is easy to produce more Champions than a Japanese player can produce Samurai. Archers take out Samurai like they do with most infantry.
- ES_Deathshrimp
In our original spec, we planned to have certain units have multiple attacks. For a number of reasons, none of which were because it was hard to program, this was scrapped. Two reasons for dumping it were, first, the icky interface it led to, and second, the immense annoyance a player suffered when his multi-units used the 'wrong' attack. Example: you have a bunch of samurai. Suddenly you spot an enemy erecting a trebuchet nearby. Frantically, you target it with your samurai and scroll off that screen to find more soldiers to fight it. When you return, you find that the samurai are uselessly shooting arrows at the treb, which has meanwhile destroyed your castle. If they'd only rushed up with swords, they could have killed it. Quick responses are essential in RTS games, and multi-attack units tended to undercut this. So we went for simplicity.
- ES_Sandyman
Koreans
Unique Unit: War Wagon (cavalry archer); Turtle Ship (armored war ship)
Unique Tech: Shinkichon (+1 range Mangonels, Onagers)**
Team Bonus: Mangonels, onagers +1 range
- Villagers +3 LOS**
- Stone Miners work 20% faster
- Tower upgrades free (Bombard Tower requires Chemistry)
- Tower range +1 Castle Age, +1 Imperial Age (for +2 total)
Mayans
Unique Unit: Plumed Archer (strong archer)
Unique Tech: El Dorado (+40 Eagle Warrior HP)
Team Bonus: Walls cost -50%
- Start with +1 villager, Eagle Warrior (not Scout Cavalry), -50 food
- Resources last 20% longer
- Archers, Plumed Archers cost -10% Feudal Age, -20% Castle Age, -30% Imperial Age
Mongols
Unique Unit: Mangudai (anti-siege cavalry archer)
Unique Tech: Drill (Siege Workshop units move 50% faster)
Team Bonus: Scout Cavalry, Light Cavalry, Hussar +2 LOS
- Cavalry archers fire 20% faster
- Light Cavalry, Hussar 30% HPs
- Hunters work 50% faster
Comments:
I have been getting either several people or one person several times (I'm too tired to figure out which one) urging the concept of a mounted Mongol skirmisher. Looky here, son, the ONE unit that the Mongols have the very LEAST need of in the whole wide universe is a skirmisher. I mean, get real. A skirmisher's goal in life is to protect your poor hapless troops against those mean nasty enemy archers. If there's any civ in the game who DOESN'T need any defense from archers, it's the Mongols! Their _enemies_ are the guys who need mounted skirmishers!
If the Mongol UU was a mounted skirmisher I don't think I would ever build a castle as a Mongol player at all, unless I was absolutely desperate for trebuchets or the Conscription technology. Instead of this, the Mongol UU has been carefully thought out and is a useful and welcome addition to their other civ benefits. While it's possible that after a while a Mongol player might decide to produce his UU at the expense of ordinary horse archers, this is hardly the end of the world, and this kind of effect is seen with a few other civs as well -- English are unlikely to build arbalests; Teutons rarely train champions; and Turks don't research hand-cannoneer very often.
- ES_Sandyman
Persians
Unique Unit: War Elephant (cavalry)
Unique Tech: Mahouts (+30% War Elephant speed)
Team Bonus: knights +2 attack vs. archers
- Start with 50+ wood, food
- Town Center, Dock 2X HPs; work rate +10% Feudal Age, +15% Castle Age, +20% Imperial Age
Comments:
Persia is actually a pretty poor rush civ. I know--I tried it yesterday. The problem is that Persia is a very cavalry-oriented civ and cav are easy to counter with spearmen or camels. All units are easy to counter with the right counter-units, but Persia is not very adept at switiching to archers or infantry. To make matters worse, cavalry are expensive, build slowly and are poor against buildings. They are awesome in large numbers in the late game, but I would rather rush with infantry, who can knock down buildings, or archers, who can shoot up villagers. Persians are good at booming for obvious reasons.
Persians are a lot of fun in the first few minutes of the game because their extra resources give them a great deal of versatility. You can afford to explore a bit more before laying down that first mill or lumber camp or switch to a fishing ship strategy earlier. Fishing ships are not quite as effective as they were in ROR, due to their cost and build time, but a Persian player can offset this bonus a bit. The superior town center and dock have no effect in the first age, but do let you quickly ramp up to your full villager or fishing ship component in later ages. You can also recover from an attack quickly, provided you haven't blown all your resources on elephants.
(On Unique Units @ GS Showcase:) This is one of those areas where fun wins out over historical accuracy. When we were first coming up with unique units for all the different civilizations, a lot of the units we came up with were fairly indistinguishable. A unique unit needs to be truly unique; not only should it look like nothing else, but it should play like nothing else in the game. Unique units are not the same as superunits, like the paladin and arbalest. The Briton longbowman grants an ability to his civilization, in this case absurd range, that no other civilization can match. Up until the point where we gave the Persians the elephant, there was no expensive but extremely powerful unit in the game except for the Teutonic knight. While it is true that Persia did not use war elephants much past the time period of the AOK Dark Age, once you see an army of elephants stride boldly into an enemy town, it is pretty easy to forgive the anachronism. Elephants elicit fear like few other units. - GameSpot Showcase
- ES_Deathshrimp
The Persian town center bonus means that all production and research performed at the town center is done more quickly. For instance, it takes something like 140 seconds to research the Castle Age. A Feudal-Age Persian TC gets a 10% bonus, so it would only take a Persian 126 seconds to research the Castle Age. (These numbers sound real precise, but I don't actually remember how long the castle age takes exactly.) Or if it took 20 seconds to train a villager, a Feudal Persian would only take 18 seconds to train him. In addition to age research & villagers, there are 5 other research items in the town center.
Q) Since the Persians have weak walls and towers, how do you suggest a player playing this civ should protect themself long enough to get eles(note the plural), much less get upgrades for them?
A) Persian walls and towers are as good as anyone else's in Feudal and Castle. It's only late Castle/Imperial that they start dropping down the curve, which ought to give them plenty of time, especially considering that they are an attack-oriented civ, which means their _enemies_ are usually the ones on the defensive.
Q) Based on your response from my last question(a few days ago), the Persians don't get anything largely above average besides cavalry and navy. What else should a Persian player use to get rid of those pesky pikemen that could collapse their entire army? (cavalry archers, possibly?)
A) You have answered your own question correctly.
Q) Except for their weakness in towers/walls, I am assuming that Persians can last long into Imperial, with their powerful UU and full line of cavalry.
A) They just have to keep on the offensive.
Q) How fast are eles once they have been given the 'husbandry drug'?
A) They are still frustratingly slow. As they should be. I think husbandry adds +10 percent to your speed is all. Which makes a big difference to units at the high end of the scale, but not elephants.
Q) It's been often mentioned that the Persians main strengths are cavalry and elephants. But other than that, what units can they get/will work well for them? How strong are their archers, ships, siege equipment, and walls/towers?
A) cavalry: better than average
foot archers: worse than average
cavalry archers: average
navy: significantly better than average
siege: average
walls/towers: significantly worse than average. Their disadvantage here starts to surface in mid-Castle.
Q) Do the Persians rely too much on elephants like in Age of Empires?
A) Actually, I found that the Persian elephants (except in Deathmatch) were not that wonderful in AoE, because of the constant food shortage you had. In AoK, the high cost of the elephants means that a Persian player has to rely on other units throughout much of the game. His super-units are the last to get the elite upgrade (usually), and non-elite war elephants, while still hard to kill, aren't nearly as dangerous to other civs. A Persian who wants to fight sans elephants will soon find that he has access to every single mounted unit in the entire game.
- ES_Sandyman
Saracens
Unique Unit: Mameluke (ranged camel)
Unique Tech: Zealotry (+30 camel, Mameluke HP)
Team Bonus: foot archers +1 attack vs. buildings
- Market trade cost only 5%
- Transport Ships 2X HPs, 2X carry capacity
- Galleys attack 20% faster
- Cavalry archers +3 attack vs. buildings
Comments:
Q) Will any UU, Super Unit, or any other unit be able to stand a chance against the Saracen UU and live to tell about it?
A) The mamelukes are generally less-effective against units that have good normal armor. They are also vulnerable to most siege weapons, and are ineffective vs. fortifications. They do not have good piercing armor, and so take heavy losses from enemy missile troops (particularly hand-cannoneers), though they also inflict heavy losses in return. Finally, the mameluke is one of the most expensive of all the UUs. They even cost more gold than the infamous elephant (less food, tho).
Q) Horse Archer bonus vs. buildings? What kind of bonus is that?
A) An extremely useful one. A Saracen cavalry archer does three times as much damage to a building as a 'normal' cav archer. It means that the Saracens are the _only_ civ that can use ranged soldiers (as opposed to the ever-vulnerable siege) to destroy an enemy town. Add this to the mamelukes, and you have a deadly combination.
Q) Are there any drawbacks that the Saracen player faces when playing against a good defensive civ?
A) Sure. To show you what I mean, the Saracen navy is an attacking navy. Its bonuses and researches are offense-oriented. Thus, fighting the Saracens at sea is tough. BUT if you do manage to get the upper hand, the Saracens find it quite hard to retake the ocean. As compared to, say, the Byzantines or Chinese, who have fine defensive ships so they can maintain a naval presence even if they are no longer dominant at sea.
This same principle is generally the case with the Saracens. When they're on a roll, they're very hard to stop, but if you CAN stop them, they find it hard to get going again. Their units are not terrific at recovering from a disadvantageous situation or sitting out a siege.
Although perhaps I have actually answered the wrong question. The Saracens are, in fact, an excellent foil for a defensive civ -- they strike, the defensive civ counterstrikes, and so forth. But this kind of war just goes on until one side makes a mistake or runs out of a critical resource at a bad time.
The civs that the Saracen has to be very careful against are not so much the good defensive civs as the other offensive civs -- if the Saracen takes a bad loss in battle, he can't really protect his town adequately from a strong attacking civ. This is also the case with the other offensive civs (such as Goths), of course, and it makes these kind of battles rather interesting -- betwixt Saracen and Goth, the fight is most critical & decisive, because once one of them gets into the other's town in force, it's curtains! On the other hand, the first time or two that the Byzantines get a troop of forces into your town, you can probably survive unless something has gone seriously wrong.
'Lost in Bikini Bottom' is a SpongeBob SquarePants episode from season nine. In this episode, SpongeBob gets lost while taking a shortcut to work. On a normal day in Bikini Bottom, Squidward is taking a relaxing bubble bath and is in a good mood until he realizes he has to go to work. Lost in bikini bottom torrent.
Q) Don't you think that the Saracens are too strong a civ (excellent infantry+Very Strong UU+ Stong Siege+ top-notch ranged units+good economy)? If they lack any heavy cavs., that is substituted for by a killer hybrid of ranged and cavalry which is the Mameluke? What is their weakness?
A) Here are some weaknesses.
- No heavy cav. While the Saracens don't fear other players' heavy cav, they also don't get the advantage of having their own armored strike force. Heavy cav performs useful tasks that no other unit does quite as effectively.
- Average-to-middling defenses. Good enough for Castle age, but once you get into late Imperial, the Saracen fortifications start to look a bit threadbare. Still, there's worse-off civs.
- Their economic bonus is highly useful, and is probably my favorite economic bonus of all AoK, but it is not the kind of bonus that you can easily parlay into fast advancement, and it also has no effect in the Dark Age. In fact, the more skilled you are at micromanaging your economy, the less vital the Saracen bonus becomes! Maybe that's why I like it so much -- because I'd rather manage my armies than my economy.
- An Attack Navy instead of a Defense Navy. If you are the kind of player who doesn't like to mess all that much with the ships, Byzantine or Chinese is much better for you -- when the enemy Cannon Galleons come by to pelt your coast, you can quickly turn out a few demolition or fire ships and make the foe take notice. But you can only really take advantage of the Saracen navy if you like playing with boats. Not all players do.
- Their unit bonuses are not unit-oriented. For instance, a Mongol horse archer, all things being equal, will defeat a Saracen horse archer. Similarly, a British foot archer will defeat a Saracen foot archer. Of course, the Saracen archers can destroy buildings far more quickly, but this is cold comfort if your units are being killed in one-on-one. Sure, the Saracens get fully-upgraded infantry but (for instance) so do the Celts and Japanese, plus the latter get an infantry bonus besides. This is perhaps not so much a 'weakness' of the Saracens as a lack of special strength, but you can see where I'm going with this.
- ES_Sandyman
Spanish
Unique Unit: Conquistador (mounted hand cannoneer); Missionary (mounted monk)
Unique Tech: Supremacy (Villager combat skills increased)
Team Bonus: Trade Cart, Trade Cog return +33% gold
- Builders work 30% faster
- Blacksmith upgrades don't cost gold
- Cannon Galleons benefit from Ballistics (fire faster, more accurately)
- Hand cannoneers and bombard cannons fire 15% faster**
Teutons
Unique Unit: Teutonic Knight (slow infantry);
Unique Tech: Crenellations (+3 Castle range; garrisoned infantry fire arrows)
Team Bonus: units more resistant to conversion
- Monks heal from 2X as far
- Towers garrison 2X units, fire 2X normal garrison arrows
- Murder Holes free
- Farms cost -33%
- Town Center +2 attack/+5 LOS*
Comments:
The Teutonic Knight is analogous to AOE's Phalanx, in that it is a slow unit that hits hard. Teutons have more armor and hit points than virtually any other unit, but make up for it with a slow speed and high cost. In fact, when dealing with unit balancing, we consider the Teutonic Knight to be worth twice the number of opposing units, since they have nearly twice as many hp, but are twice as expensive. Players who enjoy rushing through an enemy town shooting villagers will probably favor civilizations such as the Mongols and Saracens over the Teutons. However, because of the infantry bonus vs. buildings, it is very hard to stop a line of Teutonic knights before they level your Castle and half your city. The knights have so many hit points, have enough armor to shrug off most attacks, and (like all Teuton units) are highly resistant to conversion, that there is not a good counter measure to a Teutonic invasion. When an enemy sees an army of your knights escorting rams and trebuchets come slowly but inexorably over the hilltop, he has plenty of time to panic.. which is always nice. - ES_Deathshrimp @ GameSpot Showcase
Turks
Unique Unit: Janissary (hand cannoneer)
Unique Tech: Artillery (+2 range Bombard Towers, Bombard Cannons, Cannon Galleons)
Team Bonus: gunpowder units train 20% faster
- Gunpowder units +25% HPs, researching gunpowder technologies costs -50%*
- Gold miners work 15% faster
- Chemistry free
- Light Cavalry, Hussar upgrade free
Age Of Empires 2 Civilization Strengths And Weaknesses List
* Changed from Age of Kings. (AoK - Gunpowder units +50% HPs, researching gunpowder technologies costs -50%)Comments:
The symbolism of cooking and eating was deeply ingrained in Janissary customs. The officers were given ranks such as corbast (soup cook), and any regiment which lost its soup kettles to the enemy was permanently disgraced. The Janissary symbol of privilege was the tall, white cap. Foreign observers who saw the Janissaries in battle described how the hat was so ungainly that it often fell off or had to be held on with two hands. Apparently, Janissaries were allowed to choose their own weapons, so regimental armories were crammed full of whips, flails, battle axes, maces, halberds, a profusion of swords and many, many missile weapons, particularly firearms, for Janissaries delighted in long-range weapons.
- ES_DeathShrimp @ GameSpot Showcase
Vikings
Unique Unit: Berserker (regenerating infantry); Longboat (war ship)
Unique Tech: Berserkergang (Berserks regenerate faster)
Team Bonus: Docks cost -25%*
- Warships cost -20%
- Infantry +10% HPs Feudal Age, +15% Castle Age, +20% Imperial Age
- Wheelbarrow, Hand Cart free
Comments:
Q) Do the Vikings get any high-end units at all, or just assorted middle level units?
A) The Vikings are not short-changed when it comes to high end units.
Q) Is the berserker stronger than a champion/men-at-arms/huskarl, or is is just cheap and fast to train?
A) The berserk is a marvelous unit with a rather unusual special ability, and if I were a viking AND had a castle I would build them instead of champions.
Note: The Beserker's special ability is that it heals over time without assistance from a monk.
- ES_Sandyman
Copyright © 1997-2019 HeavenGames LLC. All Rights Reserved.
Please obtain prior written permission from HeavenGames if you wish to use our site's content and graphics on other sites, publications, or media. Age of Empires II: The Age of Kings is a game by Ensemble Studios and published by Microsoft Game Studios.
Disclaimer Privacy Statement Forum Code of Conduct
Topic Subject: | My Personal Top 5 AOE2 Civilizations |
posted 04-26-15 09:34 AM CT (US) Well, welcome to this forum topic.. I hope you all will enjoy this one, but here goes my top 5 aoe2 civilizations. These, I believe, will have a severe advantage over many. 1: Byzantines From being one of the most research filled civilizations, to dealing a spectacular amount of damage.. The Byzantines are very good in particularly every area. Defense is an area they excel in though. If you're planning to wall in your civilizations, feel free to! The Byzantines have excellent tower defense and archery. With their special unit, the Cataphract, it's trample damage will slay the most mightiest opponents, with only pikemen able to stand a fighting chance. But who can stand a chance against this civilization's wide range of military units? Maybe a little lacking in Siege Weapons, but with their general prowess, you can almost always win with this team civ. 2: Teutons I've always loved the design of the Teutonic Knight. It's a very slow but skillful unit that can cause grieve to the other enemies. Destruction of buildings is what it does best. At best, he is a beast, waiting to be unleashed in the Castle Age. But that's not why the Teutons are my 2nd favorite. Just like the Byzantines, the Teutons have a wide range of units that help you attack. In the early stages, impact is most likely the least powerful. But advancing on to past the Feudal Age; these guys get tough to stop. Maybe lacking in the Scout Cavalry area, and missing out on Eagle Warriors and Camels, their fully upgradable towers and bombard towers give them a tremendous chance at winning. Defense is their forte, but if you ever need offense, don't be shy. This civilization can give you all you need, and lack only in flaws. 3: Huns No houses needed. WOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOO! That's what I scream during my victory dance when I pwn you noobs so hard with this civilization. Obviously, very overpowered. Maybe even the potential to become within the top 2. But the reason why I put this at #3 is because you can screw up, but win easily. No houses will not restrict you from making as many villagers as you want; no more headroom issues, just sleek, undisturbed gameplay, waiting at your fingertips. But wait, there's more! The Huns have a great advantage of countering infantry. Their cavalry archers and Hussars + the unique unit Turkans can destroy almost anything in their path. Of course, a weak civ in infantry (not regarding the pikeman or halberdiers, but rather the swordsmen), but a very strong civ in cavalry (with a speed creation bonus) allows them to adapt to almost any map. Not too shabby on water either.. So go ahead and play as these guys. You might love it, or just completely ravage the lands of the opposing teams. 4: Mongols Cavalry. That's it. That's all there is to this. Cavalry. Anything that rides a horse, and rides considerably fast, you got it. You have all the power. Everything you need is in that one station. Cavalry. The Mongols don't have very great infantry or defense, but when you have great siege weaponry and cavalry archers + the great team boost to cavalry in general, adding hit-points and increasing your chance at a complete domination, if the Castle Age Rush is executed almost close to perfection.. This team is absolutely horrid in the first few ages, but once you get Mangudai, you're in the top spot. Everybody knows the Mangudai is the most versatile unique unit. The Hussars and Light Cavalry are amazing. The hitpoints and attack damage, they are great at killing away the opponents villagers, and if the opponent is Monk Rushing you, just send in a horde, with backup (from Mangudai) and the other team is S-C-R-E-W-E-D. Well, the siege weapons also move faster, so the other team is even more S-C-R-E-W-E-D. 5: Mayans You may be wondering why these guys are number 5 and not number 3+.. Well I have a specific reason for that issue. But first, let's talk about their pros, not the cons. Addressing the pros; Mayans have spectacular starts to the game. 20% longer lasting resources allows a greater boom in economical standards, and more units to be created. The Plumed Archer is a very cheap unit as well. But don't worry, it's getting your BANG for your BUCK. These guys are extremely fast and in groups, deal more damage than many archers would ever do in bigger ones. The only disadvantage, is their low HP. Hey, did I mention the Eagle Warriors? In the Imperial Age, El Dorado (a research from the Castle) increases the Eagle Warriors' hit-points by 40 points? With Elite Eagle Warriors and plumed archers, you better be scared. The Keep is also great for defending. You don't need to be sad missing out on Bombard Towers, just be happy that you have Keeps. This is why they're way better than the Aztecs. Missing out on Monk bonuses and Cavalry doesn't affect you that much when you're as prolific as these guys. Overall, this civilization aids you in the Castle and Imperial ages, but also doesn't hurt in the beginning as well. I hope you guys enjoyed my long thread/topic here. It took me 30 minutes to write, and I might be playing some AOE2 today! ~ Rishi | |
Author | Replies: |
HockeySam18 Dúnadan | posted 04-26-15 10:44 AM CT (US) 1 / 28 These are all very good civs. The general consensus in the competitive community is that the top 5 civs in AoC are as such: 1. Huns 2. Mayans 3. Aztecs 4. Celts 5. Vikings There is some debate about the top 3 - several players argue for a different order, some saying that Aztecs or Mayans should be #1. This list by Carlos Ferdinand offers a nice explanation of why these are the top 5 civs. Honorable mention goes to Goths, Mongols, and Britons (in that order). They are all fast civs as well but don't quite match up to the top 5 for several reasons. In AoF, I'd say that the order goes like this: 1. Mayans 2. Mongols 3. Aztecs 4. Huns 5. Vikings Honorable mention goes to Celts, Goths, and Britons (in that order). The difference from the AoC list is due to various balance changes introduced in AoF. If anyone wants further analysis or explanations from my end, I'm happy to provide it. This is a personal view and others may certainly have different views on the order of the top civs - it's very competitive, though which 5 civs make the top 5 in AoC is all but set in stone (though as aforementioned the exact order is not). AoF is more balanced and thus is more competitive. Naturally, personal playstyles can affect the order a bit as well 'Cattle die, kindred die, every man is mortal: But the good name never dies of one who has done well.' - Hávamál 'Hockey is the only sport left for true men.' - ax_man1 |
posted 04-26-15 10:51 AM CT (US) 2 / 28 The general consensus in the competitive community is that the top 5 civs in AoC are as such:I hope that's not a deliberate attempt at misinformation. 1. HunsNo, there really isn't any discussion. On arabia, the list is: 1. Aztecs (because they're by far the fastest) 2. Mayans 3. Huns 4. Celts on more easily wallable open maps and maps where castles are of great utility, Mayans are #1, on closed maps Celts are #1, on arena Aztecs, on water maps Vikings, you get the drift. The reason Huns are more popular than meso civs in non-tournament games is that they're the most 'exciting' to play, i.e. much less likely to wall. They're also the only of the top 4 civs that usually goes for a feudal fight, instead of drush+fc, which is considered lame (just like walling). Also, a lot of players like feudal fights. My personal favourites are Mayans and Celts, because I like to drush, wall and boom in an arabia 1v1. I also think that Mongols are extremely overrated in 1v1s, even on yucatan, because they have a very weak mid-game. Btw all this is ONLY for 1v1s. In team games, the list looks a lot different: Mayans Huns (except for land nomad) Mongols Spanish/Persians/Chinese Vikings on water, ofc And just for completion's sake, the best Deathmatch civs are Huns, Goths and Saracens. [This message has been edited by Aleph (edited 04-26-2015 @ 11:26 AM).] |
HockeySam18 Dúnadan | posted 04-26-15 12:07 PM CT (US) 3 / 28 Aleph, my lists take into consideration all maps and situations, not just 1v1 on Arabia. Perhaps my linking of Carlos' list (which is for 1v1 on Arabia) caused a bit of confusion on that front. It indeed goes 1. Aztecs 2. Mayans 3. Huns in 1v1 on Arabia, but I'd like to think that's not the only criteria in ranking civs in this game. They're also the only of the top 4 civs that usually goes for a feudal fight, instead of drush+fc, which is considered lame (just like walling). Also, a lot of players like feudal fights.Indeed. The power (even OP-ness) of drush+wall+FC is a severe balance problem in AoC, and certainly contributes to a degree of redundancy, especially in highly competitive games (because, you know, why would you not use the proven #1 strategy if you're trying to win?) I also think that Mongols are extremely overrated in 1v1s, even on yucatan, because they have a very weak mid-game.I quite agree. The lack of any eco bonus after hunting is done hurts them in the mid-game, though it makes them wicked fast early on. One rather underrated change in AoF is the 50% decrease in delay for non-elite Mangudai, which helps them a bit once they drop a Castle. And of course everyone knows how powerful they are in Imperial. Their stock definitely rises in TG. And just for completion's sake, the best Deathmatch civs are Huns, Goths and Saracens.This actually contributes a lot to my ranking of Huns as #1 overall. When you have one civ that is undisputably a far and away #1 in a major game type (as Huns are in DM, which has a major community of players, btw), it's worth considering overall. I probably even did Vikings a disservice by giving them #5 overall when they are even more dominant on water maps than Huns are in DM. In AoF, Magyars and Slavs are both very strong in DM. All the FE civs are actually stronger all-around than they seem, though their different playstyles may be a little off-putting for some. None would crack the top 5 in my opinion, but a couple of them are probably in the mix for the top 10. 'Cattle die, kindred die, every man is mortal: But the good name never dies of one who has done well.' - Hávamál 'Hockey is the only sport left for true men.' - ax_man1 |
posted 04-26-15 12:36 PM CT (US) 4 / 28 Perhaps my linking of Carlos' list (which is for 1v1 on Arabia) caused a bit of confusion on that front.I didn't even click the link. Trying to make one ranking of the civs over all game modes and maps is quite pointless, in my opinion. There won't be a single setting where the ranking is accurate, and even overall it's quite subjective. How much do you weigh the different maps and modes? I would barely take DM into account at all, because it's much less played. If you weigh DM and team games equally to 1v1 RM, then Aztecs shouldn't even be on the top 5; Huns aren't the best civ in any RM setting, actually they're the worst civ on LN; and so forth. And even if you'd put a lot of effort into an overall ranking with defined parameters of the weighing of the modes and maps, there wouldn't be a single specific situation where that ranking would have any relevance. Every player has a preference of maps/settings he plays, and you always know what game you're about to enter. I hope you understand why I think that an overall rating is a really stupid idea. Also, if you were talking about an overall ranking general consensus in the competitive communityI'm quite sure no competitive player would even bother doing an overall ranking, so that statement is definitely false. [This message has been edited by Aleph (edited 04-26-2015 @ 12:53 PM).] |
HockeySam18 Dúnadan | posted 04-26-15 01:28 PM CT (US) 5 / 28 That's a fair point, but it's a question worth addressing anyway for speculation's sake. Not all players are experts, and so being more concise is going to help the majority of people more than 'civs A, B, C, D, E are top on map X, civs F, G, H, I, and J are top on map Y, and so on' because that's a ton of info for people to handle in one sitting. And the reason I used the phrase 'general consensus' was to imply that it wasn't definite - indeed everyone is entitled to their own opinion and you're free to disagree, but that's what I've gleaned from my own experience and from various conversations, reads, and stream watching. So perhaps saying 'general consensus' was too much, but 'educated guess' or 'inference' would by no means be a stretch. In any case, as you say, everyone weighs different maps and settings differently. While you don't value DM, I do because a) it's a distinct game type as opposed to a specific map and b) it actually has a significant community of players across various platforms. So I would weigh modes over specific maps, despite the many who suggest that Arabia is the be all and end all. Land and water are also drastically different, though of course you know that Making an overall ranking may not be your cup of tea, and it may even be an exercise in futility, but it's worth a try. While it doesn't help much for people with extensive game knowledge, it's a nice starting point for beginners who don't know all the ins and outs of the game. We should take them into account too, especially considering that they make up the vast majority of the AoE2 community. 'Cattle die, kindred die, every man is mortal: But the good name never dies of one who has done well.' - Hávamál 'Hockey is the only sport left for true men.' - ax_man1 |
Age Of Empires 2 Civilization Strengths And Weaknesses List
posted 04-26-15 03:16 PM CT (US) 6 / 28 You're absolutely right, the target audience matters. But even the noobs should be aware that an overall civ ranking has no relevance for any specific setting, and I know that a lot of them aren't. For example, ZeroEmpires made a list exactly like yours, and I've seen people trying to argue that Huns are ALWAYS the better civ, based solely on that list. |
HockeySam18 Dúnadan | posted 04-26-15 03:40 PM CT (US) 7 / 28 Agreed. It's a good starting point, but that's all. Anything beyond that and the nuances become massively important. I've actually seen those lists as well - it's a hotly debated subject to say the least 'Cattle die, kindred die, every man is mortal: But the good name never dies of one who has done well.' - Hávamál 'Hockey is the only sport left for true men.' - ax_man1 |
posted 04-28-15 05:06 PM CT (US) 8 / 28 my top 5 id have to say in order are Goth Celts Huns Mayans Franks Goth as number one because of their sheer speed. if I can get slinged in game I have found it easy (im a expert RMer) to take out at least 2 opponents if not critically hurt or setback a 3rd. I love rushing in with huskarls mixed with rams very early castle it is devastating that early to loose a tc. Celts as second because I love siege with WR. the combo is close to unbeatable. in the hands of expert players celt is probably one of the most deadly civs. Huns as third because one they r fast needing no houses, a much undermined bonus nowadays. plus the fact they can go cav archer and paladin. excellent options for most situations. huns are amazing in rm and are the DM gods. Mayans I love mayans due to the ability to reserve Resources and the ability to sling because of it. Franks I love franks as well due to the perfect Paladin is made out of this civ, they have the best paladins in game and quite honestly a army of frankish paladins knocking at your door isn't a nice sight. 'In 1678 doctors diagnosed a mental affliction soldiers suffered from as 'nostalgia' - homesickness, a longing to return to the past. The cruel reality of war is that there is no return home. No return to innocence. What is lost, is lost forever. Like my father, war's wounds have bled me dry. No words of comfort; no words of forgiveness. No words at all.' |
posted 04-30-15 01:08 AM CT (US) 9 / 28 For arabia, Aztecs, Mayans, Huns, Celts and Vikings. For big water maps, Vikings, Huns, Japanese, Saracens, Mongols (not sure about the order, varies according to the map). For BF, Aztecs, Celts, Mongols etc Some civs that come consistently in the top for most maps are Mayans, Huns and Vikings. Aztecs, Mongols, Celts etc are also pretty good for almost all maps. CARLOS FERDINAND 2-- THE MEDITERRANEAN DRIZZLE MY GOTH MEN-AT-ARMS STRATEGY CARLOS FERDINAND - 1. A KINGDOM'S DAWN 'I may disagree with what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it' - Voltaire |
posted 04-30-15 12:43 PM CT (US) 10 / 28 Interesting Discussion. I agree with most of what has been said. However, I have a question concerning the vikings. Is what being stated is the following? #1 'The vikings are one of the top civs only in maps dealing with water' Or is this what is being stated? #2 'The vikings are one of the top civs' If #1, then I 100% agree. However, if #2, I struggle to see how this could be a true statement. Vikings have appeared to me to be one of the weakest civs militarily. Economy wise, vikings are strong, but without the military tech to back it up, they cannot be regarding as a strong civ. This is especially true in early and late imperial. Castle age is when vikings have hope, but if an opponent can fight through to imperial, it is over. In AoF, the vikings have been helped out a little bit to counter some of the issues fighting cav (berserks get a bonus against cav). However, I still find it difficult to rate them at the top of the civ listing. [This message has been edited by Saegan (edited 04-30-2015 @ 12:44 PM).] |
posted 04-30-15 05:52 PM CT (US) 11 / 28 Vikings are excellent castle age civ fighters, however anything after castle age they basically become useless in a sense. they are weak in imperial. typically ill support my allies in imp age with arbs and some rams but mainly wall up and tribute from that point. 'In 1678 doctors diagnosed a mental affliction soldiers suffered from as 'nostalgia' - homesickness, a longing to return to the past. The cruel reality of war is that there is no return home. No return to innocence. What is lost, is lost forever. Like my father, war's wounds have bled me dry. No words of comfort; no words of forgiveness. No words at all.' |
posted 05-01-15 10:15 AM CT (US) 12 / 28 Saegan, the '#2' statement in your post is what is being said. Here are the main reasons: 1. Vikings are the undisputed top civ on water maps (for obvious reasons). 2. The Viking economy (with free Wheelbarrow and Hand Cart, as well as cheap docks and warships) is quite arguably the best in the game. 3. Vikings are weak in the late-game compared to many civs, it is true, but with their excellent eco and military might that is up to par with most civs up through early Imperial, they have quite a good chance to end the game before late-Imperial. 'Cattle die, kindred die, every man is mortal: But the good name never dies of one who has done well.' - Hávamál 'Hockey is the only sport left for true men.' - ax_man1 |
posted 05-01-15 11:52 AM CT (US) 13 / 28 Ok, so if my understanding is correct, you are stating that a good player will do his best to end the game early with the Vikings, taking advantage of the eco advantage etc, and won't have put himself in a situation in the late game with the vikings. My question arises then in the situation where you do random civ closed map (bf, arena, etc) where you opponent can turtle, can the vikings still be considered top where an imperial end battle is unavoidable? Or in the scenario of a 1v1 between equally matched opponents, one is Teutons and one is vikings, the battle goes on through the ages until imperial, I feel that the vikings will be under-matched. |
posted 05-01-15 02:41 PM CT (US) 14 / 28 Ok, so if my understanding is correct, you are stating that a good player will do his best to end the game early with the Vikings, taking advantage of the eco advantage etc, and won't have put himself in a situation in the late game with the vikings.Yes. But even if the game reaches post-Imperial warfare, the Vikings are still strong enough to win the game provided they have leveraged their strength in the early game into an advantage at that point. However, if a game between two equal players, one Viking and one Saracen (for example) reached the late game and were relatively even at that point, then my money would always be on the Saracen player because that civ is superior in the late-game. My question arises then in the situation where you do random civ closed map (bf, arena, etc) where you opponent can turtle, can the vikings still be considered top where an imperial end battle is unavoidable?It is precisely for this reason that Vikings are one of the weaker civs on maps like BF and Michi. Arena is a different situation, imo, because battles will start in the Castle Age, where the Vikings are quite strong. Conversely, civs like Koreans (the worst civ in the game, imo) can be dominant on BF and Michi because those games inevitably become Siege Onager slugfests in post-Imp. Or in the scenario of a 1v1 between equally matched opponents, one is Teutons and one is vikings, the battle goes on through the ages until imperial, I feel that the vikings will be under-matched.But if you're assuming the opponents are equally matched, that scenario is contingent on the Viking player underperforming for much of the game. Teutons have a good eco due to their cheap farms, but the Viking eco with free Wheelbarrow and Hand Cart is superior, especially on a water map. Simply put, Vikings are the faster civ. But if a game unfolded like you said, then the Teuton player should win the Imperial war. 'Cattle die, kindred die, every man is mortal: But the good name never dies of one who has done well.' - Hávamál 'Hockey is the only sport left for true men.' - ax_man1 |
posted 05-01-15 08:42 PM CT (US) 15 / 28 Fascinating. My opinion of the Vikings has been changed, thank you HockeySam. I will need to take another look at the Vikings this weekend. |
posted 05-02-15 06:13 PM CT (US) 16 / 28 No problem 'Cattle die, kindred die, every man is mortal: But the good name never dies of one who has done well.' - Hávamál 'Hockey is the only sport left for true men.' - ax_man1 |
posted 05-03-15 04:02 AM CT (US) 17 / 28 In my experience meso-american civs are a joke. Teutons and Byzantines all the way! And Persian elephants wreck just about everything. Still in the Dark Age Don't be a melodramatic clown. ~Mr Wednesday [This message has been edited by MrMew (edited 05-03-2015 @ 04:03 AM).] |
posted 05-03-15 08:32 AM CT (US) 18 / 28 Far from it, they're top civs in most situations. With their fast ecos, they can pull off a quality rush or go for the oft-used drush + wall + FC strategy that is OP on most non-water and non-closed maps. The Aztec drush is especially potent because with free loom, they can pump out 5 militia without needing to send a villager to mine gold (any other civ usually goes for 3) and the starting Eagle Warrior is OP in Dark Age (hence why Eagle Scouts were introduced in AoF). In Castle Age, Mayans can go for a castle drop + Plumes, which are arguably even better than Conquistadors in Castle Age, and Aztecs will most probably go for massed Crossbows. In Imperial, Mayans can go for the quite strong combo of EEW + Plume + Ram, while Aztecs can invest heavily in EEW, which with the Garland Wars UT is probably the best unit in early Imperial, but they also have plenty of high-octane options aside from the dreaded EEW spam. The Incas in AoF are quite strong as well; it's just the unconventional playstyle required for them that can throw people off. Cheap fortifications naturally are great for Tower rushes and Castle drops, while villagers being affected by Blacksmith upgrades is a great help against enemy raiding. What is probably the most difficult thing to grasp about the Incas is that the unit combination they need to field is comprised of several unit types which collectively require a ton of upgrades. Once you get a nice combined army together as them, though, they can be quite hard to beat. 'Cattle die, kindred die, every man is mortal: But the good name never dies of one who has done well.' - Hávamál 'Hockey is the only sport left for true men.' - ax_man1 |
posted 05-03-15 05:17 PM CT (US) 19 / 28 . With their fast ecos, they can pull off a quality rush or go for the oft-used drush + wall + FC strategy that is OP on most non-water and non-closed maps.Now these statements I can wholeheartedly agree with. it's just the unconventional playstyle required for them that can throw people offAnd this is one of the reasons why I really enjoy playing as the meso-American civs. I really have enjoyed the Incas in AoF. The discount in stone for buildings is excellent for a Trush and each house counting as 10 pop is excellent for Flushing. Also, the Incas UU kamuyaks are the perfect counter to all cav Next to the Byzantines, the Incas are one of my fav civs! |
posted 05-03-15 08:41 PM CT (US) 20 / 28 Im a pretty weird hybrid. I like early aggression raiding (a small scout or archer rush on feudal with massive farms, large gold mining, and little to no stone mining save for bare minimum to to keep more vills busy on wood) with simultaneous boom to keep my opponents eco weak whilst mine is becoming massive. I don't like super late game massed paladin fights where everyones defense is super buffed, rather striking my opponent while he is weak and sacrificing defense for offense whilst not slowing my eco down. So i like civs like these: 1: Vikings: My favorite civ. Super fast eco with free wheelbarrow and handcart that holds up all game with all eco techs save for stone shaft mining and guilds. They have one of the fastest fast castles and can skyrocket from their easily giving them the chance to close the game before the enemy even clicks up to castle (which is perfect for my playstyle). Even though their knights are terrible, their perfectly capable of preforming a knight rush, since everyones knights are the same in castle it doesn't even mater. And lets not even get started on their disgusting water game that makes them absolute gods on any water map. Sure vikings are weak late game on land, but a good viking player wont let it drag on that long. I like the challenge of using there unique army comp on land, and their UU, the berserk, is extremely underrated. The fact that there just beefed up faster champs is awesome because there way stronger against archers, and they can beat any other civs champs. But thats not what makes them shine, its the regen thats underrated and makes them so awesome. There actually a very good raiding unit. The regen means they can take some tower or castle fire and retreat without having to need a monk or be replaced. You could effectively have just one raiding party the entire game that would never need to be healed or replaced. Even with there weak late land game, they are redeemed by there undisputed water game. Over half of Full Random Map games are water based which is why there still considered a top tier civ. Any water map and its almost like a free win sometimes. 2) Goths: A gothic horde of huskarls and champions flooding your base with no sign of slowing down or even lightening up is a terrifying sight. Their defenses are weak, but the best defense is a good offense and goths have that in spades. Their ability to effortlessly defend with units is great. Defending with infantry is infinately better than defending with buildings because they can quickly adapt to any situation by making direct counters, and they can immediately replace lost units. This also allows them to make an immediate counterattack after their enemies military has been wiped out. Their lack of stone walls means they can use the extra stone to upgrade things and build forward castles and extra TCs. Forward barracks are also very powerful as one gothic barracks is equal to roughly 3 barracks for anyone else, and fast boar hunting allows for a fast castle age with immidiate access to hulkarls allowing for a direct assult onto an enemies TC. They also have good gunpowder units and bombard cannons, my favorite siege unit in the game. A boomed goth is a terrifying presence on the battlefield. 3: Britons: Faster sheep gathering allows for a very fast caslte age followed up by raiding longbowmen. Longbowmen can easily pick off vills and are able to soften up the enemies main force before their fully upgraded infnatry of alright cavelry take the fight to the fronts. Then they can fall back at a safe distance and destroy the enemys in pitched battles. They can easily preform feudal archer rushes and destroy the enemy eco whilst not hindering their own eco at all, setting up for a devestating longbowmen and infantry/cavelry/siege strike. Longbowmen are one of the best, if not the best, UU in my opinion. 4: Celts: not really my general play style, but when the game does drag on, the celts can make minced meat out of most civs. Easily the best civ on BF, their allways my choice for those games that drag on (on open maps i still prefer the Goths). Their super siege and fast infantry is a fantastic attacking force, and their super strong Heavy Scorps makes up for their lack of arbalests. Woad raiders cam devestate an enemy fort and if they fail to end it, it just opens them up for a final attack. 5: Mongoles: A great civ perfectly suited for my play style. Their super effectev scout/light cav rush makes them feared on maps like arabia and the Mangudai is another amazing unit. Possibly the only civ to effectively defend against the celts and any seige on a black forest map makes them another deadly civ on black forest as well. Their light cav is great for raiding late game if it gets to that as they can soak up lots of damage and can effectively replace knights when recources run low, but a desent mongole player will never let it get to that. Of course every civ is good, and it just depends on your play style and map type. I would say o really dont like the turks, koreans, saracens, or really any slow defensiv civ with less than stellar economies. [This message has been edited by Linestar (edited 05-22-2015 @ 11:06 PM).] |
posted 05-04-15 07:42 PM CT (US) 21 / 28 HockeySam18, could you explain the Incan playstyle? I'm very interested. |
posted 05-05-15 06:45 PM CT (US) 22 / 28 Incans have a few nice eco bonuses: - Start with a free llama - Houses provide 10 pop space (as opposed to the usual 5) - Fortifications cost less stone - Farms are built faster (though this is admittedly quite minor) Naturally, this relatively fast start can be translated into a decent feudal rush. The Incas excel at tower rushing, though this can be hard to pull off if you're not an experienced player. I've seen many inexperienced players try a tower rush just to have it denied (putting them behind) or have it not cause enough damage, allowing me (or any other player) to get up to Castle Age more quickly (as they have invested so much in the tower rush) and send Knights or Crossbows rampaging around their base for the win. Just like any other civ, Incas can go for the OP strategy of drush + wall + FC (fast Castle Age), and have two options from there. One is mass Crossbows, the generic complement to the drush + wall + FC. The other is to go for a Castle drop, which is facilitated by the cheaper stone cost for buildings mentioned above. Building a Castle gives the Incans access to Kamayuks (trained at the Castle) and Slingers (trained at the Archery Range). You can think of a Slinger as a Hand Cannoneer available in the Castle Age - a very strong unit! The combination of Eagle Warriors, Kamayuks, Slingers, and siege is quite hard to counter, albeit costly in gold. Their UTs complement their units quite well, and as long as they keep a good eco up they can raid enemies to whittle them down and then bring in some siege to mop them up. 'Cattle die, kindred die, every man is mortal: But the good name never dies of one who has done well.' - Hávamál 'Hockey is the only sport left for true men.' - ax_man1 |
posted 05-06-15 04:28 PM CT (US) 23 / 28 Thank you. |
posted 05-06-15 05:04 PM CT (US) 24 / 28 Glad to help! 'Cattle die, kindred die, every man is mortal: But the good name never dies of one who has done well.' - Hávamál 'Hockey is the only sport left for true men.' - ax_man1 |
posted 05-22-15 11:02 PM CT (US) 25 / 28 Im not even a very big fan of the no house thing for the huns. I think in Arabia i would rather be mongols or goths because walling with houses is pretty important. I mean what are you gonna do if your the huns, wall with lumbercamps? Lol no. Palasides are pretty weak too, so not the best in an FFA i think. Pretty good in oneVone, but i just think that their most used and obvious option is to scout or knight rush, which is easily countered by spearmen and skirms. Knights do destroy spearmen, but idealy youll be easily able to outnumber them with your spears because they are soooo much cheaper, especially for goths. http://www.4smileys.com/smileys/people-smileys/viking-smiley.gif Ja! Til Bardaga! |
posted 05-23-15 04:33 AM CT (US) 26 / 28 Funny you mention that, it's exactly the reason why I don't like Huns. Need them houses to wall. They're still ridiculously strong because of the saved vill time and wood, and because their CAs are OP as f***. |
Saegan Squire | posted 05-23-15 06:37 PM CT (US) 27 / 28 I will need to take another look at the Vikings this weekend.So I finally got around to trying the Vikings on Voobly the other week and have to agree, Vikings are one of the top civs. It was a GA 3v3 and I was on the flank. Me and the enemy were flushing back and forth and he was gaining ground. I was able to get to the castle age roughly about the same time as he did. As he was making his way to my base, I pulled a bunch of villies away and feinted a retreat. He promptly started pouring into my city, What he didn't realize is that I had taken those villies and built a castle right next to his town upon which I starting spamming beserks. Needless to say, I was shocked by how quickly beserks can take down buildings. By the time my opponent had realized what had happened, I had destroyed all the military buildings in his base and his tc with all his villies in proximity. He attempted to send his attacking army back to save his base, but at that time my ally came and helped me mop up his army. Needless to say, he resigned shortly after. The eco boost allowed me to build the beserks in the first place, and the UU boost allowed me to raid and destroy his eco quickly. [This message has been edited by Saegan (edited 05-23-2015 @ 06:38 PM).] |
posted 05-25-15 08:10 PM CT (US) 28 / 28 Yes, berserks are awesome! I think that they are very underrated, the health regen is super nice. They do have less health then the viking champ which is really stupid, but they also have better armor, speed, and they regenerate and do more damage. I like them for raiding because they can go in, do some damage, get out and heal up from any tower or castle fire they took to go in again in less than a minute. Just make sure to back them up with Arbs. They can even stand up to paladins after they research chieftains alot better than any civs halbs (I think they still lose oneVone, but they are also much cheaper). I think they need to be able to be buit at the barraks though or have a buff in the next update because alot of viking players just prefer to use champs because they are far easier to mass. But yes berserks level buildings very fast. The vikings are actually one of the best land civs in the game. On arabia they have a super fast Crush and car rush knights effectively, or can do a feudal archer rush into a castle age without much problem. Free wheelbarrow and handcart really skyrocket them in feudal/castle. The only reason people say they are lack luster on land is because games like BF are so common, especially for players who suck to much to be able to flush or defend from a flush. The vikings really only suffer on closed maps, do pretty great on open maps, and thrive on water maps. Their siege is also very nice. They only miss siege onager which a lot of people don't even research unless it is absolutely necessary because it is soooo expensive. They have the support of siege rams which is in my opinion the best siege unit in the game and are amazing when filled with berserks, and their arbalests are some of the best in the game. Those and their trebs and even their bad light cav (for dealing with sige and raidng or acting as distractions) is all they need IMO. Also I think it would be super cool if the viking infantry were able to construct buildings like the norse civs in other games like AoM and AoE online. http://www.4smileys.com/smileys/people-smileys/viking-smiley.gif Ja! Til Bardaga! [This message has been edited by Linestar (edited 05-25-2015 @ 08:17 PM).] |
Age of Kings Heaven » Forums » General and Strategy Discussion » My Personal Top 5 AOE2 Civilizations | Top |