You must be logged in to post messages.
Please login or register

Age of Empires / Rise of Rome / Definitive Edition
Moderated by Suppiluliuma, PhatFish, Fisk, EpiC_Anonymous, Epd999

Hop to:    
Welcome! You are not logged in. Please Login or Register.9 replies
Age of Empires Heaven » Forums » Age of Empires / Rise of Rome / Definitive Edition » Weakest overall civ
Bottom
Topic Subject:Weakest overall civ
Ragnax
Clubman
posted 03-05-12 08:55 AM ET (US)         
I forgot everything about AOE so i want to remember this

On one side we got hittites with overpowered Cats
On the other we have Rome with super infantry

WHO WINS?
AuthorReplies:
Fisk
Champion of AoEH
(id: Fruktfisk)
posted 03-05-12 12:33 PM ET (US)     1 / 9       
Well, since different civs excel at different game modes, it is hard to tell for certain. Shang is the one of the worst DM civilizations, while they're one of the greatest in RM. Choson is vice versa.

//The warrior of Isola

"I lack quotes that demonstrate Humor Intelligence or anything about me."

Pineapplefish
Cleidopus gloriamaris
plismo
Clubman
posted 03-05-12 01:21 PM ET (US)     2 / 9       
DM the weakest mostly said is Yamato as they don't have strong sieges. Only Cents, HHA and Cataphract that are only useful in RM. RM between Greeks and Choson; I think it's Choson in my preference.

In RM Yamato rocks really well so for Yamato it's better to finish the game at bronze age. Choson it's better to iron make either ballista tower or legions like mad.

Choson however in RM can make good rushes their towers can protect them a little better than most towers from other civilizations. If you ask me most players lacks the ability to understand this game to it's best and they will tell you Mace, Cho, Greeks and Roman = Tool Rush better.
Basse
Clubman
posted 03-05-12 01:36 PM ET (US)     3 / 9       
In DM, I wouldn't call any civ weak. When I was at my best, I could win vs hittite with yamato. Yamato has cents to kill the eles, and nice cav to kill their siege.

I don't think there is a "weak" civ in DM, but in RM there are a lot of weaker civs, such as mace and greek.
plismo
Clubman
posted 03-05-12 01:51 PM ET (US)     4 / 9       
The problem in DM the calvary rush it is hard to do most calvary units takes a long time to load considering the map you get it's large. There are many ways to block calvaries or heavy calvary while you are upgrading to Cataphract for example massive towers, priests, and many archers can flea out a calvary. In DM calvary is the most useless unit you could ever create unless the DM game becomes a late gaming RM when you lack resources calvary can be useful to hunt villagers down. As for Macedonian have cheap stone throwers and strong hoplites vs bonus archers. I think RM is more balance than DM. At DM shang can be useless vs Hittite Heavy cats and scythes will kill shang's heles and scythes.

I doubt that many cents from Yam can kill many armoured elephants from any civilization the strongest melee unit is the armoured elephant can also do good vs siege sometimes if closer to them. Legions from Cho and Roman can kill many elephants as they are the cheapest 3 legions can outnumber 1 centurion.

[This message has been edited by plismo (edited 03-05-2012 @ 01:52 PM).]

Fisk
Champion of AoEH
(id: Fruktfisk)
posted 03-05-12 03:09 PM ET (US)     5 / 9       
Actually Centurions are often superior to armored elephants, especially if used right. However they die a lot faster when exposed to siege units.

Still I wouldn't agree with Basse. Although player skill and speed is a lot more important in DM than your civilization, I definitely wouldn't say that there are no bad DM civs. I mean, if I would play a player of equal skill level, Hittites would have a clear advantage against Yammy.

//The warrior of Isola

"I lack quotes that demonstrate Humor Intelligence or anything about me."

Pineapplefish
Cleidopus gloriamaris
PhatFish
Mr. Beta
posted 03-05-12 03:19 PM ET (US)     6 / 9       
Palmyran. I played a few times with them on the Zone, but the high vill cost just makes it impossible to "catch up" on your foe, unless you're an expert in which case the 20% gather rate can be quite advantageous.



plismo
Clubman
posted 03-05-12 04:25 PM ET (US)     7 / 9       
It is true hoplites are cheaper and loads faster than Armoured Elephants, however; if you use Armoured Elephants from Phoenician, and Persian they will have more elephants than your centurions even from Greeks it will be useless.

Centurions can be useless in RM as you can make alot of archers only from Greeks may survive or Macedonian.

Palmyran can only be weak if you get tool rush it is really hard to come back from a rush. Considering you map doesn't gets enough food or good food. If your get the best map palmyran can lead to be one of the best. 20 villagers from Palmyran it is equivalent to a 26 villagers from a normal civilization somehow like it.

[This message has been edited by plismo (edited 03-05-2012 @ 04:26 PM).]

Suppiluliuma
AoEH Seraph
posted 03-05-12 07:03 PM ET (US)     8 / 9       
Actually Centurions are often superior to armored elephants, especially if used right
And using right means avoiding massed elephants!. When massed, the damage area of the armored elephants will tip the scales in favor of the pachyderms. If a number of Centurions clash directly with a similar number of Arm. Elephants the chances of winning for the centurions become greatly reduced. I used to etst it often and the centurions win hands down when they go 1 vs 1 against non massed elephants, they still win in 2 vs 2, but when 3 vs 3 fight, the Arm. elephants win. So extrapolating it to larger numbers, Centurions chances don't look that good.

Now, regarding Hittites vs Yamato in DM, Basse must be talking of that time when he beated the crap out of me XDD (I was that infamous Hittite player that lost). But as Fruity says, it isn't a fair comparison when player skills are that different (I am the worst AoE player you would ever meet, nuff said). Also, besides the fact that I underestimated Yamato, I commited another huge mistake: I focused on training elephants and catapults, both kinds of units consume a lot of time to be trained. If I had Focused on Heavy Horse Archers (much less time consuming, and besides that, with the Hittite archer attack bonus) and Elephants or H. Cats, the story would have been totally different. Besides don't forget that a good player would have taken advantage of forward 'Ballista Tower built up'as they often do (even if they are not Choson).

Lastly but not least: the advantages of Palmyran economy start to get felt only after you have a significant number of villagers (10-15 maybe?). That kind of advantage should allow you, at least in theory, to support a larger military population as less slots would be diverted into villagers while your economy is similar to your non Palmyran enemies.
plismo
Clubman
posted 03-05-12 07:19 PM ET (US)     9 / 9       
Palmyran is strong enough with 16 villagers a fast bronze with 16 you can create at least 6 camels to beat out your opponent. Despite the fact, bad maps appears most of the time 16 villagers it might be better for a tool rush 20% doesn't means that only 10 villagers will do what 16 does I think it's less sorry if I am wrong but 20 is enough to compete vs a normal 25 or 26 villagers from other civilization. I usually play with palmyra between 16 or 20 or even 23 or 27 if the map permits with greater food around the map.

You are right mass damage from elephants is enough to say Cents doesn't works effective against them. Legions can rush your army but if it's phoenician, macedonian and persian you will be in great danger.
You must be logged in to post messages.
Please login or register

Hop to:    

Age of Empires Heaven | HeavenGames