[h3llkite28]

Honestly I find both civs not that boring.

Malians can have very unique ways in their “transition tree”, as their xbow play is potent (and sometimes surprising) early and can be somewhat used for a camel+xbow composition later.

Both civs have a fantastic infantry line in lategame due to their bonus and unique tech respestively which comes handy in more matchups than one would think.

Yes for super pro level some aspects won’t shine that much, but for intermediate players good games with these civs can feel pretty awesome.

[crazyyoco]

Depends what you want.

Slavs pocket is no doubt stronger than malians.

In 1v1 Malians are so much more versitile that you cant realy say they are bland.

[JookimMADNESS]

I play longswords very often.

Malians are top tier longswords civ, you mix in pike and go one tc surprise attack.

The wood savings is really good to get better timing.

On top of this, it is like top 3 nomad civ.

[SimpatheticNS]

Farimba is one of the best techs in the games

Also you can do every strat in castle age

Also fast university is lowkey great for early bbc push in imp

I find farimba light cav and bbc push to work really well personally for late games

[Parrotparser7]

Because Malians can turn their eco bonuses into advantages for nearly every composition, and have quite viable infantry.

They have every castle-age tech in the game, and have one of the game’s only dedicated raiders, with excellent post-imp cav to fall back on until the game ends.

From beginning to end, they’re a unique civ with strong tools to shunt traditional compositions and punish inattentiveness.

[Thangoman]

Malian military is more interesting, Malians have more interesting maps and Malians are faster to get going.

And in generall every malian bonus can be very useful.

With Slacs you are just mostly using only your farm bonus

[Author]

Posts