So what's the best faction?
The Huns just like for the last 20 years.
Portogal
Vikings
>>330647783
depends on map and personal taste
recommended for idiots:
open land maps
>huns, mongols, mayans
boom land maps (mostly black forest)
>persians, turks, aztecs, spanish, celts, koreans etc, everything with strong post-imp shit
water maps
>vikings, saracens, japanese
dunno exactly where the new civs fit in the current meta. portugal and byzantines (because fire ship buff) look interesting on water, berbers looks extremely strong on land with cheaper knights, ethiopians could be a very good fast castle civ, etc
Whoa, a AoE2 thread is less than 50% WE WUZ posts.
I'm partial to Japs and now Ethiopians, but they're certainly not the best.
I think huns took a hit with the new expansions for lots of overlapping reasons, new civs being good against them, camel buffs so horse cavalry aren't your only option and infantry buffs too. For similar reasons I'd argue Vikings aren't even clearly the best on water maps anymore.
The expansion was fantastic in that sense, there are so many good civs now, much less seems overbearing, bar the Malians, they're retarded as fuck.
>>330651053
>I'd argue Vikings aren't even clearly the best on water maps anymore.
yeah, feudal fire ships pretty much own a viking now if he only pumps galleys
>>330651142
Yeah, that's a big deal, but there's the issue that the Vikings can micro to kite and kill fire ships sometimes, but that depends on a lot of variables.
Certainly much better than it was.
>>330651053
>Whoa, a AoE2 thread is less than 50% WE WUZ posts.
It really depends on the image used by the OP.
>>330647783
teutons
>Teutonic Knight are literally stronger war elephants while occupying less space
>can make paladins and champions to backup the knights
>+3 range to castles
>can eliminate minimum range of castles
>Bombard fucking Tower
>cannon fucking galleons
>op monks
>cheaper farms
prove me wrong.oh wait, you can't
>>330652010
except for teutonic knights, which is one of the worst units in the game, all of these things either don't matter or are done by other civs better.
especially +range to castles, what an ungodly useless bonus holy fuck
>>330652198
all these thing are only done by a couple of other european civ that have an even shittier unique unit
>>330651515
The thing about that pic is that it's not far from the truth. I've been saying this shit for years, Nation of Islam and Islam have only antisemitism in common. NoI is a saucer cult, one of the first, too, and unlike Scientology (which NoI influenced), all of its information is free. I can't believe people are just now learning about this stuff when Trapped in the Closet was, like, a decade ago.
>>330651053
>bar the Malians, they're retarded as fuck.
>tfw end up in prolonged trash war vs Malians
where did it all go so wrong
oh right
>gbeto's
this is the most antifun shit ive seen in any rts
Goths since you can spam 100 huskarls and champions in less than a minute
Berber
>>330652909
Goths are only good in the late game, and even then they're a predictable one-trick-pony.
>>330652909
>friend likes to play goths
>cuck him every game with scorpions and hand cannoneers
i don't even feel bad, goths is the most basic fucking shit in the game, the guy just refuses to learn
>>330652294
okay, let's break it down, I played this game for over 10 years in european a-leagues, so lets see
>Teutonic Knight are literally stronger war elephants while occupying less space
useless, die to anyone who uses archers or Hand Cannoneer, too slow for anything, not even half as tanky as a war elephant, no area damage like war elephant
>+3 range to castles
>can eliminate minimum range of castles
absolutely fucking useless. maybe against AI who tends to send single rams to your castles, but human opponents literally don't care. murder holes can be developed by more than half of the civs btw.
>Bombard fucking Tower
>cannon fucking galleons
useless and are next to never built in any match (some exceptions in FFA matchups)
if you want cannon galleons, you go spanish
>op monks
aztecs or saracens. teutons only profit from coversion resistance
>cheaper farms
this is actually good. too bad they have no other ressources bonus, so they only profit a bit in the beginning from it, while civs like aztecs gather every ressource about 15% faster through the entire game.
seriously, teutons is THE noob choice, but the actual strength of the teutons are the post-imp tech tree, sadly with a shit unique unit and no late-game military bonus, which makes the pretty mediocre in every aspect.
>>330653532
ok, tell me which one is a god tier civ then, and why.
WE
>>330653696
malians
WE
>>330655809
>>330654278
SHOULD STOP
>>330655890
I agree.
>>330653696
see
>>330650591
this is my breakdown for the classic+expansion civs.
again, it depends on your style of gameif oyu want an all-around civ that is good from early to late game on land maps, choose mongols.
>scout bonus means way easier exploring at the beginning
>hunter gathering bonus mean fast and easy feudal if you want to rush
>best light cavalry and best cavalry archers in the game
>excellent tech tree - nearly all upgrades in barracks, archery, stable, blacksmith, siege workshop and harbor
other very good all-around civ would be mayans and aztecs (aztecs have a 'hidden' farm gatherer bonus for example, about on par with the slavs).
if you want to find a good civ for you, look for the following:
>economical upgrades - does the civ allow me to gain ressources faster or profit from something that is cheaper?
>military upgrades - does the civ have somehow stronger units or can produce them more quickly?
>tech tree - does the civ have techs that I want to utilize in my strategies (siege units, blacksmith, harbor, halberds, elite skirms, hussars for trash late game etc)
there are popular or fotm civs, but no very best. for a noob, I'd say mongols, mayans and huns mostly, vikings on water. with those civs, you can learn various essential strategies like flush (feudal rush), fast castle and galley rush to get the hang of the game.
>you will never discuss strategies and meta on /v/
all I can do is watch youtube videos of people moderating the games
>>330658443
because startegies and meta are fucking nofun shitter tier, you should use your own brain to deal with an evolving sitiuation on the battlefield
WE
Theres no "best civ" because it depends the kind of map and terrain you use.
Arabia babies can go fuck themselves.
>>330658443
rts games are shit in mulitplayer, nobody here plays them
>>330662014
And AoE2 is particularly gookclicky. More than SC2 for sure, possibly more than Brood War because of the significantly more complex resource system.
>The 2nd mission in the Mongol campaign where you have to kill the traitor.
>Wipe out the Kara-Khitai
>Make some towers, wall right before that wood wall you're intended to destroy
>Get a sizable army ready too.
>An enemy scout comes by the edge of the fence.
>Convert him with a monk
>Send him to fuck off around in enemy territory to die.
>Eventually an enemy army comes up to the fence
>They don't destroy it so I pick them off with horse archers
>Evidently Kushulk was among them so that won me the mission
well OK
>>330647783
Huns are top tier.
I love the Magyars though.
