Do You Find Any Civilization Dull?
- This topic has 38 replies, 1 voice, and was last updated 1 year, 11 months ago by
.
-
Posts
-
Italians
Britons, Franks, and Mayans
You literally know EXACTLY what they gonna do every game…
cuz thats all they really do well
Not exactly.
I really dislike the Meso civs but I can’t call them bland, as they are wildly different.
If it’s not Persians and douching it’s bland
Burmese.
Arambai is super unique but still unable to bring the total coolness meter above “boring” line
Bland as in “not unique”, I don’t think so.
Bland as in “I’m tired of constantly facing them because it’s the same thing every time and basically whoever gets to castle first almost always wins” it’s Franks.
I think anything with a unique mechanic or unique “unique unit” is not bland.
Some people have called Japanese and Burmese Bland.
But I don’t think so.
Burmese have Arambai which is a very unique UU.
There is nothing like it.
Japanese have their deadly mma opening and yasama towers.
I think the most bland civ in the game are the Slavs.
Their unique unit is basically a stronger knight.
Their bonuses aren’t particularly exciting.
Just tweaked numbers.
Cheaper siege, cheaper castles after tech, free supplies, faster farming.
Franks are also in the bland category, their only slightly redeeming grace is their UU which is a bit different than non-unique units.
Consider for example another cav civ, the Khmer.
They also have faster farming, but it’s different (no drop off point required).
They get a really Unique UU.
They get usable elephants, their vils can garrison in houses.
No building requirnemnts.
All this makes the civ quite unique.
Persians are also not super exciting.
But compared to Slavs, they are still a bit more unique.
Their UU is THICC.
Not very usable 1v1 but still something non-bland.
Their trashbow archers add some interesting flavour.
They can also do the douche of course.
Persians and Slavs feel the most generic at the moment.
Slavs should have got something for their monks when orthodoxy was removed, and I wouldn’t mind them getting some other infantry bonus to kick in between free supplies and Druzhina.
I’d like Persians to get an imp UT for Cav archers that semi-compensates for the lack of bracer, with the effect of Mahouts moved to elite war elephant upgrade
Franks are incredibly bland to me.
Slavs always felt like they’re missing a unique identity to me.
Slavs probably.
They don’t have good CA like they did in real history and the Boyar is just a mounted teutonic knight.
Feels like they could do with an extra buff or two to make them competitive and interesting
Another vote for Slavs.
I feel like the only time it is relevant that I’m playing as Slavs is when I am late game.
Slavs.
Their cav is generic, their infantry, IMO, is generic, Druzina is expensive as shit and it doesn’t help infantry against archers at all.
Their monks are FU, but no other bonuses.
Their only true strength is siege, but they are still generic, and without any way to increase their tankyness still quite weak.
The discount is also minimal.
They need more power to their infantry.
Or just the old monk tech built-in.
There is no civ that is bland at every stage of the game and on all maps.
However, on maps with dominant metas across most civs, e.g., on Arabia, civs that have only one good standard option soon feel bland.
For instance, Sicilians and Persians are just kinda nice boom and cavalry civs until quite late in the game.
At the same time, it’s up to us to liven things up with unusual plays!
Spanish.
I despise them.
Castle into conqs every nomad and arena since the dawn of time
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.
