Do You Find Any Civilization Dull?
- This topic has 38 replies, 1 voice, and was last updated 1 year, 11 months ago by
.
-
Posts
-
Slavs
I love Slavs, they’re perhaps my favorite civ, but they *are* generic.
Persians
Italians is quite bland in its design: every bonus is a discount.
They are the discount civ.
UTs are yawn as well.
Only redeeming factor is their UU.
Slavs felt quite bland to me before as well, they still do to an extent, but Detinets is is game changer.
I’ve used it once and spammed castles on the nap, such fun!
Their boni apart from the farming never felt that impactful and you win or die before you get to Druzhina.
Dravidians feel like Vikings with their limited military options, being practically funneled into MAA-archers.
But their eco bonus is so much worse.
At least with Viking eco you feel very powerful.
For me thus is the ‘roll over and die’ civ, but granted my experience with them is limited.
Persian boni are not that outspoken.
Everything is quite subtle.
Full stable, but no unit that shines.
Unpopular opinion: Burmese.
You get free lumber upgrades, better infantry, heavily armored elephants and cheaper monk techs.
Sounds fun but honestly it just plays out badly, your elephants suck, I’m never going mass monks in imperial age or smush and there’s more interesting infantry bonuses.
Arambi are the only redeeming quality but cost too much and just feel out of place.
Burmese just feel like they’re all over the place and I don’t like their options (archer user), plus extra infantry attack is lame.
I don’t know about bland, but Sicilians definitely need a nerf
Gonna have to be Persians for me: open tech tree and a good boom just isn’t that interesting
Mayans.
All you’re doing is either archers or eagles.
Persians.
Put it to a vote.
Make a poll.
Do it. 🤠
Slava might be”bland” mainly because a large portion of players don’t use siege enough.
Boyars are cool and (if you ever get there) druz infantry are awesome.
Persians are just dull.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.
