State of the Civs 2024 - Part 5 (Finale!) | AoE2: DE

[@windwindy5356]

There is a historical reason why Vietnamese CA has extra hp. During Ly dynasty in medieval age, the Vietnamese did have formidable cavalry archer forces and these troops were very successful. All nobles and officer of all ranks during this time must know to use bow on horseback.

[@VuLinhAssassin]

It also extended to Tran dynasty, every prince, duke and baron had to be versatile in the art of war. In Later Le and later dynasties, Vietnamese made extensive use of firearms, so the lack of hand cannoneer to me is a bit weird, but at least we had bombard cannon (I wish we had some bonus for it 😢)

[@SIGNOR-G]

Now i want to know more. I thought that Vietnam terrain wouldnt allow for great horse archery.

[@VuLinhAssassin]

@@SIGNOR-G We still have flat terrain for large conventional Battlefield

[@SIGNOR-G]

@@VuLinhAssassin in the northern areas?

[@VuLinhAssassin]

@@SIGNOR-G Yes. the battle of Binh Le field, our first encounter with Mongol force, the enemy cavalry archer could fully utilize their hit and run tactics and forced Tran army to make a withdrawal

[@87JJosh]

The devs holding on the patch just waiting for the full Ornlu tier list of the civs to know what to balance. Just amazing!

[@tiltiege7842]

Ah THANK YOU. I have been arguing that Teutons are power crept for so long. I feel so vindicated rn.

[@618Delta]

I kind of wonder if part of the reason the meta is so fast now is the maps themselves. Since DE came out the devs have made the following changes: - Thinned out Arabian woodlines and pushed them farther back - Added more hills closer to your base - Reduced house and palisade foundation armor - Increased palisade build cost - Increase palisade build time - Decreased palisade hp in Dark Age All of this contributes to make defense on Arabia, frankly, a huge PITA. Pros start going for and valuing much faster, more offensive strategies because you can't guarantee that your map won't have a massive hill in front of your TC with your main gold on it. I wonder if the devs reverted some of these changes, the meta might slow down a little and let those "slower" civs catch back up.

[@OrnLu_AoE]

If you go back to AoC (and even HD I think?) and load up Arabia, it's crazy just how different the maps are! Yes, those changes definitely impact the meta

[@AlphaSquadZero]

I find the pros not being able to just wall up every time all the time, has been great from a viewer's perspective.

[@quasibrodo923]

If Vikings had a bonus where ships or maybe just specifically the galley line dealt +1 or whatever to fire ship line, then, You could balance the bonus around the galley and fire galley. +1 is proportionally less meaningful later on, and with longboats and their multiple projectiles, they deal with fire ships better than the galley line. I think you’d try balancing so that Viking galleys traded approximately 1v1 vs a fire galley, then have Viking naval discount and lanchesters square law carry the day.

[@evanjacob8463]

I am counting down the days until Feb 23rd so I get know which new civ campaigns Ornlu will be covering :D

[@inductivegrunt94]

The amount of civs in the complete tier makes me really happy. So many civs perfect as they are now compared to those that need some serious work. Hopefully the four bottom civs can get the work they need to finally stand among all the other civs.

[@thingsmac]

I respect the sincere thought put into this, and get a warm feeling from the Development's open mind in this game. Good vibes all around!

[@kristianlykke]

thank you so much for these in-depth analysis each year. I watch religiously! Soooo good!!

[@teddyhaines6613]

I think people have actually been sleeping on Teutons for closed maps. Villese used them repeatedly on ZeWall, Hideout and Arena in TTL Season 3 and Warlords 2 and was pretty much invincible with them because Teutons simply can't lose a monk war. He made it work across a spectrum of different closed maps and quite a few different sets.

[@The_Room_2_Doggys_Revenge]

What if Vikings got a feudal longboat-like unique ship that evolves into the longboat in Castle Age?

[@ShikanRaider]

What I would do for Teutons, after trying out different mods for a while. - (Elite) Teutonic Knight pierce armor increased from 2 (2) to 4 (6) Would not make them broken, as they are still slow as hell. But I think this would make them feel more like the unit they are meant to be. Feel free to adjust the gold cost if it's too much. - Crusader Knight replaces Cavalier and Paladin upgrade in Imperial Age. Most of this can be taken directly from their campaign apparence, I did make some small changes however. Upgrade Cost: 1400 Food, 900 Gold Research Time: 200 seconds HP: 130 (150 with Bloodlines) Attack: 18 Armor: 4/4 Attack Speed: 1.8 Movement Speed: 1.3 Bonus effect: Can't be converted by enemy Monks Cost adjusted to: 80 Food, 60 Gold Small change to their HP which I think was too low, they also retain the attack speed that Knights have. Movement speed was too low, so I increased it slightly while making sure it was still the slowest cavalry unit, since Teutons don't get Husbandry. - Fortress replaces Castle HP: 4800 Attack: 12 Armor: 8/11 Range: 10 Population Space: 30 Rate of Fire: 2.25 Cost adjusted to: 500 Wood, 500 Stone Takes 20% longer to built compared to a Castle. - Fortified Tower replaces Keep Upgrade Cost: 700 Food, 450 Wood HP: 2600 Attack: 8 Armor: 4/8 Range: 13 Rate of Fire: 2.5 Cost adjusted to: 50 Wood, 175 Stone Of course that is what I would do, I'm no modder or developer, but as someone who likes this Civ a lot this is what I would like to see. I also don't think that these changes would make them broken or OP, but feel free to correct me if I would be wrong.

[@quaintserpent]

Mongols, Huns, cumans, tatars and Vikings should get major changes. These civ should have unique mechanic of mobile civ since they were never able to build towns but were raiding other civs all the time.

[@iwersonsch5131]

Cumans: TC techs (except age-ups) can be researched at the Mill; no longer able to build a second TC in Feudal (wow i didn't think yall would like this one so much) Portuguese: Non-mounted units cost 20% less Gold Romans: yeah idk there's a lot that would have to be done Normans: Hauberk grants +2/+1 and affects Serjeants, First Crusade grants healing inside Transports and Rams. Serjeant -1/-0 base armor at all ages

[@gletscherminze9372]

the first crusade one sounds very interesting

[@jaggercrue]

Those vids made my Mondays "complete" o7

[@Edelweiss1102]

Man I'm a bit pissed, I wrote a long ass comment, but my internet decided to off itself in exactly the moment I wanted to post it, and now it's gone. I won't write the entire thing again, but my key thoughts were: - having about 2/3 of all civs in the upper 2-3 tiers definitely speaks for the overall good state of the game currently - it's great to see civs like Persians, Saracens, Incas or Goths in the complete or almost there tier which means that the devs took the right steps in the past year - generally I prefer buffing the weaker civs rather than nerfing stronger ones who are fine for the most part, and smaller changes an seeing how they play out rather than radical ones. - I'd love to see more pseudo unique upgrades like the Savar or regional units to bring some more flavor to civs that might feel a bit stale. Thank you for making the series like every year Ornlu, it has become a staple in my AoE2 enjoyment haha.

[@nicholasdalby5178]

The pathing keeps getting worse overall. Sure, some updates have improved aspects, but the pathing has overall degraded in a serious way, and is most obvious if using foot archers or infantry which constantly attempt to reform a formation instead of acting as they should. These units which are fast enough to reform and slow enough to notice are truly annoying when you are REQUIRED to be precise. This was definitely not the case upon release lol

[@Hoopsnake]

I mean, I would say the Team Bonus of the Tatars feels wrong lol, especially after the Magyars and Incas got similarly lame team bonuses adjusted.

[@Prawn47]

Slavs should have had their farm bonus bumped to 12.5%. A happy medium

[@matthewmcneany]

I feel like Vikings could get fire galleys but not fir ship and maintain their identity. Probably the same for Koreans/Romans and demos.

[@Prawn47]

@OrnLu_AoE can you please make an annual video "state of the game" where you give opinions on overall balance of general items like palisade walls, the cost of crossbow upgrade, default market prices, university techs, powercreep etc.

[@erikdw8379]

Teutonic Knights aren't literally caped crusaders. They're literally cloaked crusaders. There is a difference. Now you're like Spirit of the Law in his Teutons overview when talking about the Teutonic Knight. (Please, don't take this part too seriously.) But in all seriousness, what was up with the accidentally "spoilers for the final tier list" we saw in part 3. It never shows up or gets mentioned here? Is it something that appears later?

[@Prawn47]

Love the state of the civs series, by the way. Agree with majority of your takes

[@ThisIsMyRoad]

Vietnamese suggestion: Remove Chatras (UT for expensive units is a wrong concept) Remove access to BBC Foot Archers and Elephants have +25% HP passively. (Instead of 20% for Archery range units) New UT that makes Skirmishers creation time from 22 to 11. (Imp Skirms feel generic for the most part)

[@AlexB-vt5xe]

thanks for the series, i know it takes a while to create it :)

[@edmis90]

I'm curious if pathing fix would affect any of these rankings.

[@akikapuno6764]

Does anyone know why ornlu is everywhere in the campaigns?

[@CalebBrown228]

Thx!

[@valgalla1594]

I'm surprised that Sicilians didn''t get their own tier at the bottom

[@inconemay1441]

The Pay to Lose tier

[@jvan6582]

Give my Vikings 🔥ship 😅

[@tommig1995]

Wahey! All the civs done! Thanks, Ornlu for your commitment to this series! Once again, I broadly agree with you, but to add some specific thoughts: It's a real shame they haven't got the core design of the Sicilians down because I really like the concept. They've tried so many things now though and it's a civ they just can't seem to get right. I actually don't like the new Spanish gold bonus, it feels gimmicky, ironically. I thought they already had a good gold bonus at the blacksmith, but a more targeted discount would have been nicer. They should swap the Vietnamese team bonus and imp skirm bonus, they make much more sense the other way around. I've thought it for a while, but Vikings are not a top tier civ on water, they've been hugely power crept. That said, I think water play is the weakest part of the game and I'd like to see a DLC to overhaul it, in the style of the Rome At War mod. Finally, very much enjoyed listening to you cast with T90 at the weekend!

[@brokendoll3368]

I remember you saying "Britons should have Gambesons, they always had FU Champions and they don't have anything besides Archers and Infantry, adding that makes perfect sense." I was more critical of that because Champions counter Skirms and Rams which for most civs are the best answer to their foot archers, which can be very frustrating to deal with. Why am I bringing that up? In the same patch that gave Britons Gambesons and you said the above things, another civ which always had FU Champions was not only ignored, but their ranged unit which was easier to deal with in Imp was nerfed in Castle Age: the Turks. I think they really should get Gambesons, it makes sense for them to have a trash killer and it would not have the potential to be overbearing like with Britons.

[@zhiz3074]

To me as a non-top player, I'd say Aztecs is borderline power-crept.

[@inconemay1441]

Their intention is as a high risk high reward kind of play by rushing and use their frail expensive units (Monks and Champions) as a cleaning group, but as time goes on the risks grow and the rewards shrink, making them even more difficult to play.

[@OrnLu_AoE]

There is a very fine line between complete and power-crept

[@zhiz3074]

​@@inconemay1441excellent point

[@ThisIsMyRoad]

Almost all of the new civs are either problematic or require a major redesign, it tells us a lot about the development team of this game, no offense, but we're dealing with mediocrity here, nothing personal to be fair, most gaming companies are like that these days.

[@aereoka]

i always feel cumans and sicilians are both for fast game

[@nukesomething5518]

Teutons are really too slow too react maybe bracer will help their tcs ward of raids a bit better even if that means they reduce the range crenelations gives by 1 map control is very hard when you can't catch the HC and light cavalry in your eco so tc/tower range needs to fulfill the roll the only negative would be their skrim would be better and their galleon would be a bit stronger as no ones uses teuton archers or HA

[@5cmain207]

I think that eco bonus powercreep is a problem but not power creep in general. And i think that we need a major Unique unit and elephants update. reducing spear damage to elephants and maybe giving them some extra conversion resistance. And i think too many UU are just better swordsmen/knights and they should be made to better fill a niche rather than being better (or worse) units of that type. Some units like this are totally fine but that is the identity of the siv, that for example Lithuanians have this crazy brutal knight out of the castle. I think more UU have to become situational units (either counter units or a type of unit that excells in certain builds or timings). Niche units like the teutonic knight or the battle elephant are also fine, you don't see them often but they are powerful in very special situations and when these situations come up it's always exciting.

[@thagikaagrajith]

I would say Sicilians are not that hard to fix just make their convertion resistance bonus a civ bonus and remove the Castel UT completely and then make donjon be able to made in dark age but at the speed of a barracks as a barracks replacement but Maa upgrades included as normal And as for the new UT it would be so much better if it comes with extra armor for the Sargent ( by making it a upgrade required from fudal to Castel stats ) or make it so it gives more bonus damage reduction for infantry

[@edmis90]

Ornlu, I was wondering if you know by any chance what'd happen if you opened a campaign scenario in scenario editor and changed a computer players' personality to a custom one like Immortal AI for example? Would the scenario difficulty drastically change? Attila 5 for example - I think the computer isn't too scripted there and plays how it can.

[@OrnLu_AoE]

Idk. Probs just wouldn't work quite as well

[@dasquick]

I have to disagree as far as Vikings, Vikings are a top 5 water civ and always competitive on land maps. There is no reason why they need to be a top civ on hybrid maps as well. Not every civ should be Byzantines.

[@zxylo786]

I honestly don't agree with Aztec's placement.

[@davidloureiro7294]

Seems odd that Persians is in the complete tier but Portuguese is in the major changes tier? These civs are both good at most things but not the best at anything. IMO it is okay for civs to be jack of all trades as long as they are not the best anywhere. They do have a notable weakness in that they are a very slow civ. One of the only civs without squires, no hussar for cheap late game raids, and no shipwright for faster water production. Major changes needs tier seems to indicate a small rework of some kind is needed. Portuguese do not need anything close to a rework. Maybe numbers tweeks at most. Organ guns have been nerfed so many times now and their win rates do not support that they are some ultra powered civ. IMO they are in the almost complete tier. Also, there is no way that they are less complete than Georgians which is a one unit gimmick civ that has nothing else to fall back on.

[@Mattroid99]

While I agree that Major Changes needed is exaggerated, Portuguese are still a problematic civ since they have little to no weakness regardless of what they do. One of the best and fastest starts in the game with the forage bonus, discounts for every power unit, faster timings/transitions than any other civ, and their tech tree is one of the most open in the whole game with multiple options both discounted AND fully upgraded. Even their post imp is fantastic due to Feitorias, which also makes them the best civ to transition from an all in to a decent economy by just dropping 3/4 of them. Organ Guns are still fantastic after the nerfs, is just that they are no longer insanely hard to stop (Now you can at least defend with Mangonels and Knights and they don't shred buildings, but is not like Portuguese can't add Redemption monks to counter all these things anyways) You know there is a big balance problem when one civ is S tier in 95% of the maps in the game. No civ should be this quick and this open regardless of what they do. I think you underestimate Georgians in that regard. Monaspas are absolutely broken but the civ still has great options overall (FU infantry, good archery range, siege only missing BBC, great towers for slow pushing etc.. is just that nothing compares to Monaspas 11)

[@robchang4533]

one is aoc, the other not kappa

[@b-art7685]

Hey OrnLu, I really like this series u make every year and checking your insight of this topic is very interesting bcs u give so many thoughts to this game. I just have to criticize that the video feels very prolonged whitch makes the whole watching experience very hard. Pace of a video is very important and watching minute long intro into fifth part of a series just doesnt make sense. Same with the enumeration of everything each civs have or can do... just go to the point- I want to see the review of state of the civ. Bcs of this videos felt either very boring or super interesting bcs noone is really talking about state of the civ, which is a great topic on its own. Please dont take this in a bad way, i just think if you could implement some better tempo to your videos your content would be soo much better. Have a good day and thanks for your work

[@OrnLu_AoE]

Fair enough critique! Like I said to another comment, I only spend 2-3 minutes per civ... it's just that there are a lot of them in the game right now lol. And if you want to skip the intro (which I need so that new people watching aren't completely clueless), or specific civs, you can jump to the individual chapters :)

[@torri776]

Fire Ships are incredibly unhealthy for the game's water combat design, because they beat all ships, and Demos just aren't worth the effort, especially when you need more Demos than Fire Ships to win the fight. They are too tanky relative to Galleons which are meant to be all purpose, but it's actually Fire Ships that are better due to having much higher DPS and the aforementioned durability lacking in other ship types. I think Longboats should be weaker to Galleons (opposite to Dravidian Thirisadai) but have a massive attack bonus versus Fire Ships since Vikings lack the latter indefinitely and desperately need a counter against that unit type.

[@Prawn47]

It confuses me why you want nerfs to the bonuses of civs which are too strong for certain map archetypes but don't want to change the Chinese start. Any map or game mode where food is abundant at the start (I.e. RF, Enclosed, El Dorado, Mud Flow etc.) Chinese are too strong. Exactly the point you want addressed to avoid power creep.

[@OrnLu_AoE]

Because those maps ONLY see play in tournaments. It's easier to balance new maps around existing civs than vice versa. RF is the exception, but Chinese are honestly not OP there anymore.

[@Prawn47]

@OrnLu_AoE I'm unconvinced but I appreciate the reply

[@florealkopecek1745]

👏👏👏👏👏

[@CptManboobs]

Turks should have Steppe Lancers tbh

[@aoefsmrap]

Hey Ornlu. What is your favourite Kpop group, and why is it Twice?

[@OrnLu_AoE]

Girls Generation

[@aoefsmrap]

@@OrnLu_AoE Cool.

[@pioneerAv]

Is it better to tune *_up_* the power crept or tune *_down_* the power creepers?

[@gletscherminze9372]

tuning up makes for more civ variety because strong bonuses make the civs more unique. But it may lead to some civs being oppressive on specific maps that fit their bonuses well.

[@Mattroid99]

It depends on the situation imo. Pushing up the power level so that every civ is extremely strong to keep up with the S tier civs leads to way more snowbally games where every civ advantage is extremely amplified and even small mistakes can cost you the game (Especially at the higher levels), which can lead to lower impact when it comes to your strategy in my opinion. I think you need both approaches, civs should be reasonably powerful but not to an extent that they will destroy you if you (Or your civ) can't deal with them properly (And in maps like Arena this is extremely amplified by default because is very hard to make something happen in the first 15 minutes). As of now there are many civs that are perfectly functional and powerful that don't see much play because the strongest ones are just so crazy, and that's a shame

[@OrnLu_AoE]

It can depend, but I'd rather tune down the power creepers in general

[@robchang4533]

Why buff 30 civs if you can nerf 5 civs?

[@tiltiege7842]

@@OrnLu_AoE Who are the worst power creepers in your opinion?

[@Mattroid99]

I think Saracens now are in the Somewhat Problematic tier. 145 HP camels in Castle Age is way too much, I am already against many Camel bonuses considering how good they are in the meta already (You buff them way too much and any other cavalry option is unplayable), and a civ with this many options already should NOT have Camels this strong on the get go. If they would stagger the HP bonus to 10/25% (So you have the same HPs as before without paying) and revert the Mameluke changes I think the civ will be in a good spot At this point the best thing to do with Sicilians is to remove them and apologize for making them. I hate to say it; but this civ is so uncohesive and gimmicky that they need to almost be redone from scratch. The only cool thing they have (Donjon) isn't valorized nor functions properly. Love the new Slavs personally. That being said, I think they are a bit too strong as of now and I wouldn't mind them losing Halbs. It would both valorize the Boyards vs other heavy cavalry and since they have Druzhina is not like being stuck on Pikes is too bad I wouldn't say Spanish are powercrept now personally, they still have some incredibly strong plays in Castle between donks, Conqs + siege, and they even got a bit of an early game boost with the 20 gold. Kind of a gimmicky change but it makes them more flexible As you pointed out, if the other civs were nerfed we'd see more Spanish play in my opinion I love how Tatars are as of now. One of the best, most balanced yrt unique newer civs since DE came out, is unfortunate how powercreep can make even good civs hard to play. I feel like with Teutons is both about powercreep and their core design, I would put them in the somewhat problematic tier personally because there is no getting around that. They cannot get Husbandry nor Light Cav as it would make them way too powerful in Monk wars, yet because of that the conversion resistance never comes into play. And no other civ dies to cav archers as hard as Teutons, is too polarizing. Is such a giant hole in their tech tree. Hard agree on everything about Turks! They are very well designed; still have unique weaknesses and I love how they are the only civ whose identity changes depending on whether they play an open map where mobilty is king and closed maps where they play for gunpowder and slow pushes My only gripe is Artillery personally, is too degenerate for many civs once it comes into play and they tried to balance it multiple times. If anything this civ shows how much you can diversify civs not only by bonuses; but with the tech tree too (Something I feel newer civs often forget) I don't understand why Vietnamese got so much love this year with their new eco bonus, the civ has always been in a great spot. I still think that Imperial Skirms should be a generic unit avaliable to many civs, is so weird. Is not like the civ has another much better team bonus 11 I wonder if Vikings should only get the Fire Galley without Fire Ships. It would at least make them competitive in hybrid maps without scaling long term

[@apan990]

only thing with spanish imo is to get rid of heavy demos, (ik it doesnt affect ranked at all) but their post imp water domination is unrivaled (speaking as custom lobby player mostly). but i do agree with sicilians, i just genuinely dont know wtf they even are, i thought giving them Siege onager would somehow help but no, theyre just a 'wtf do i even do' civ and whatever they can do is just ass. only exception rlly is building donjons with military units, which i guess can be used as a japanese/korean style way when pushing in closed maps. but such a strat is so niche its not even worth it, just delete or rework the entire civ.

[@Mattroid99]

@@apan990 Yeah Sicilians have genuinely no direction whatsoever. Their eco bonus is a long term payback, but the civ is very mediocre in lategame, none of their power units are good anymore (Yeah Hauberk Cavalier exist but dies to Camels and Halbs only less hard than regular Cavaliers do so what's the point), and the Donjon as a barrack is terrible, you don't have time to make it AND make a range/stable in time for your scout rush Halb Siege Onager is one of the best comps in the game and the fact they can at least do it is good in closed maps. But even there why playing Sicilians for it when you can do it with Slavs, Koreans, Teutons or Ethiopians that can do the same thing but outright better? They can't even deal with BBCs for it because they lack Redemption or BBCs themselves

[@apan990]

​@@Mattroid99 yes its just a wtf strat, i liked memeing with their faster castle build sht but when that was nerfed i just stopped caring. delete the civ or needs a giant rework, it has no place in aoe2 as it is imo.

[@mmeliheren]

you have no words for Turks it seems lol

[@Mattroid99]

@@mmeliheren LOL yeah I forgot them! Probably because I agree on everything Ornlu said, they are very well designed; have unique weaknesses and Iove how they are the only civ whose identity changes depending on whether they play an open map where mobilty is king and closed maps where they play for gunpowder and slow pushes My only gripe is Artillery personally, is too degenerate for many civs once it comes into play and they tried to balance it multiple times

[@zxylo786]

Sicilians deserve way better than the state they are in.

[@adventuresofavalon2477]

Hey Ornlu! Can you tell me the mod that you use for which at 2:01 I can see other information about the unit as well like the speed

[@jonathannickson7925]

Not a mod, a setting they added a while ago. Should be in the default options somewhere

[@hansoskar1911]

that's an option they embeeded natively into the game a few months ago. look into the settings.

[@felipea1399]

Slavs are imo hella bland. Their eco bonus is boring and is practically only used for knights. Its like a way less interesting Khmer Their siege and infantry play is more interesting but its not good enough imo. I would prefer to nerf the farm bonus and buff their infantry and siege further

[@mubashirulmoula1798]

Saracens - "Complete". Although I wish market cost -100 wood be the team bonus. And they get more naval tools to fit the "Naval civ" description like getting Shipwright and maybe a bit stronger bonus than transport ship extra HP and carry capacity. Sicilians - "Major changes needed". First of button needs to go. Secondly the bonus damage reduction on all units should have come with more flexibility in eco and in unit switch to be effective. Right now they are just wasting slots for bonuses for infantry and archer. Donjon needs to be a proper replacement of either Barracks or Tower, and not a messy mixture of both. Lastly, Hauberk got power creeped by Persians new UU Savar. Slavs - "Almost there". All the non-classical civs that have bad archer line, Burmese, Romans, Bulgarians, Slavs need some sort of interesting and unique way to fulfil the role of archer line. Devs tried with scorpion or siege in general. Maybe a new scorpion tech should be introduced instead of overloading Romans. Spanish - "Almost there". I wish they got more gunpowder usage outside of just the UU Conquistador. 18% faster firing gunpowder is straight up worse than Burgundians 25% extra attack. And Cannon Galleon ball being faster is a meme bonus (The ballistic one is a nice touch though). I think I'll give them Siege Engineers. And change the Cannon Galleon faster projectile to all cannon ball and bullet (excluding Conqs projectile) travel faster. Tatars - "Something is off". IDK why they always feel straight weak than other similar civ. Is this the result of Power Creep just like Huns? Or pure generic CA play fell off meta now? I can't quite figure that out. And their eco bonus is quite slow to kick in. Maybe with better pathing in HC_V tournament, we will see more Tatars, Huns and CA play. Teutons - "Almost there". They had been overbuffed with both extra MA on both stable and barrack units and with even cheaper farm. The farm discount can be reversed to 33%. But most importantly the team bonus need to be nerfed. It is the only team bonus in the game that is straight up stronger than another civs Civ Bonus (Bengalis elephant conversion resistance). And Teutons is overloaded with civ bonuses too. I'll swap their team bonus with monk 2x healing range. Turks - "Complete". Free LC and Hussar upgrade along with +1PA still feel very oppressive in Arena though. Vietnamese - "Somewhat problematic". Revealing enemy position didn't come with any aggressive civ design. The only agressive military bonus is free conscription which has no co-ordination with enemy position reveal. That is one of the worst civ design imho. As I want Britons to have major rework, I wouldn't mind Vietnamese get 20% faster Archery Range as the new TB. Imperial skirms be the 2nd UU like Imp Camel as trash UU have very limited use in team game anyway. UTs need to be swapped as elephant techs suit better in Imperial Age. Also since Vineyard is Castle Age UT, Paper Money should also be. Vikings - "Almost there." I wish they reverted to be an infantry civ. But that is probably impossible with the design of infantry of this game. Maybe instead of archer line, Bogsveigar give Berserk +1 attack. And Berserk, both standard and elite, get +1MA. So Berserk will be low HP and low PA but high MA and attack. While Champion is high HP and high PA but low attack.

[@apan990]

i dont play ranked and strictly play closed map TGs or diplomacy maps spanish are simply S+++++ tier civ. at least half the lobby always picks them, this wont ever be changed as devs dont really care for the lobbies i play (its mostly just ranked they balance towards), but getting rid of heavy demo for the spanish will greatly balance their absolute hilarious water domination on every water map that goes imp+. so i cant agree that its a meme bonus (if by you mean its bad) as that with ballistics is just stupidly overpowered and doesnt get enough attention.

[@mubashirulmoula1798]

@@apan990 I didn’t say the ballistic one is meme bonus.

[@apan990]

@@mubashirulmoula1798 i know > "i cant agree that its a meme bonus...... as 'THAT' (fast firing canons) **WITH** ballistics...."

[@mubashirulmoula1798]

@@apan990 The reason I think it's a meme is no cannon ball should fly like a balloon. Cannon Galleon projectile should travel at the average speed of generic and Spanish.

[@apan990]

@@mubashirulmoula1798 ahhh, the thing is tho whilst HA wise i agree, gameplay wise it would just be broken and unfun to balance nor play against.

[@niko4537]

first

[@swisspikeman8290]

I feel like you could have been much more concise with these videos and make them 15 mins long. You have a tendency to waffle a little.

[@roman5538]

well maybe some people enjoy Ornlu going on? i did not feel any of the videos was too long, but also i have 30 min to commute, where these videos are great

[@OrnLu_AoE]

Fair critique! I need to introduce the general identity of each civ, because not everyone may be familiar with how they play out in standard multiplayer settings. I try to keep the analysis concise, and every section was between 2-3 minutes long, which is what I was shooting for. There are A LOT of civs in the game, so that's why I made 5 separate videos

[@robchang4533]

I think the length per civ is okay, it still feels like pretty fast paced taking it civ per civ@@OrnLu_AoE

[@KroM234]

@@OrnLu_AoE I for one cannot understand the current trend of shortening everything down to dumb-dumb tik-tok format. It hurts people's attention span and fail to convey the information. I can understand that creator want to rub the algorithm right, but it's really getting out of hand. I miss the time when people would create videos for the sake of it, and not to please an algorithm. But hey, you do you.