“Even Hera Admits Vikings are Weaker After Devs Made Changes and I Was Disliked for Saying So”
- This topic has 24 replies, 1 voice, and was last updated 1 year, 9 months ago by
.
-
Posts
-
The video discusses how even a professional player acknowledges that the Vikings are no longer a strong civilization in the game, and that removing the thumb ring technology was a mistake.The video recommends that players should avoid playing as the Vikings on the competitive ladder until the game developers fix these issues.
I think Vikings should get a new unique tech that upgrades all villagers to berserks.
If the big monthly patch was hinted towards fixing infantry, let’s wait until then
A fix to infantry is what might save Vikings.
Giving them late game options and answers to some of their weakness is all that they really need.
And I’m hoping Berserks become so viable that the castle age variant more than makes up for the gap in the late game tech tree.
no
He did say that although vikings are still top 8 in winrate at 2k+
Chieftains should cost way less, unless they give Vikings halbs
Vikings are [#7 on Arabia by win rate for this most recent patch](https://www.aoepulse.com/civ_stats?min_elo=1200&include_ladder_ids=3&include_map_ids=9&include_patch_ids=78174&) at 1200+ ELO (which is the [top 25% of ranked 1v1 RM players](https://ratings.aoe2.se/)).
Vikings were [#10 in the previous patch](https://www.aoepulse.com/civ_stats?min_elo=1200&include_ladder_ids=3&include_map_ids=9&include_patch_ids=75350&) and [#9 in the patch before that](https://www.aoepulse.com/civ_stats?min_elo=1200&include_ladder_ids=3&include_map_ids=9&include_patch_ids=73855&).
Even amongst players 2000+ ELO (which is less than the top 1% of ranked 1v1 RM players), Vikings are [#7 by win rate on Arabia over the last three patches](https://www.aoepulse.com/civ_stats?min_elo=2000&include_ladder_ids=3&include_map_ids=9&include_patch_ids=78174,75350,73855&). **Vikings aren’t bad on Arabia; they might just be bad for Hera on Arabia.**
The pros are a tiny fraction of the player base and play only a tiny portion of all ranked 1v1 RM games.
Catering every civ design and balance patch to suit their ever-changing opinions would be to ignore that plenty of “bad” civs are perfectly fine for everyone outside their small circle and preferred settings/maps.
Their opinions matter (hence they share a Discord with the devs), but so does the experience of the other 99.9% of players.
They are one of the best naval civs, not every civ needs to be good on arabia
how were they nerfed?
on xbox too? 😭
As a Norwegian it has never made sense why the Vikings get such a powerful farming bonus.
We aren’t really known for our farming.
We are really good at preserving food however, especially fish and have plenty of old traditional dishes that comes from such ways.
So I suggest we replace free wheelbarrow and free handcart with a lesser eco bonus and a military bonus to compensate.
– Fish and hunt last 25% longer.
– All land military units(except siege?) cost 10% less.
Best I could come up with, I’ll take your downvotes now tyvm
The devs dont and should not balance around the closed circle that is pro streamer opinions and experiences.
It doesnt matter that Hera thinks whatever, his opinion as part of the top 0.1% is so utterly detached from the reality of the 99.9% that buffing Vikings because he says so is like dumpstering chinese because of tournaments.
The problem here is that infantry civs can’t go infantry and be viable.
maybe the problem was thumbring from the beginning
maybe thumbring needed to be nerfed
Wasn’t the nerf like a year ago?
Also, Vikings got picked in almost every civ draft at NAC.
It’s one of the best water civs, has a really good eco, great infantry…
To me, playing vikings as an archer civ doesn’t make any sense so the nerf was nice.
holy cringe
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.
