Thats a big if tho 11Sicilians are okaiysh... their scouts can do a really good job in feudal if the opponent is open. also, their eco bonus is not bad.
burgundians atleast have some potential in teamgame pocket, where sicilians really struggle as they dont have a good lategame unit, (burgundians also kinda meh with their mediocre paladins, but the coustillier is pretty good, the gunpowder also pretty good, and the transitions and early imp powerspike actually really good).Sicilians are okaiysh... their scouts can do a really good job in feudal if the opponent is open. also, their eco bonus is not bad.
Burgundians are really bad, except in those maps where you can actually fight long feudal fights and make the tech eco one age before... except you don't have bloodlines. So, they have certain moments where they can be somehow usefull... all in all, really bad civ
Vikings = worst civ confirmed.Burgundians is B tier
Sicilians is S tier
See what I did there? Kappa
I will never understand how you could think people thought them OP after the gigantic nerfs given to them.Some people were all over AOEZone about not playing DE because MS was literally making it pay to win with these two civs. I wonder where those people are today.
Because they just designed the civilization so poor. You give a civilization a too strong aspect which made the civ revolve around that. Once you nerf that, its basically useless civ. Burgundians had 1 shotting units and Sicilians had 50 units spawn out of nowhere, which made them too strong. Previously, those were the things that made them broken. Now they nerf them, they are seen nowhere.Some people were all over AOEZone about not playing DE because MS was literally making it pay to win with these two civs. I wonder where those people are today.
Yes but why expend any energy tweaking them when they could simply be deleted instead?They need some tweaks for sure. I do think there is enough there for them to become relevant. A bit like Tatars or Bulgarians, kinda useless before but now quite viable after the tweaks.
Then we would lose the very fun new campaigns, beautiful models and animations for castles, wonders and unique units and some of the best voice work this game has ever had. Balance is not the only thing that makes this game enjoyable and I'm a bit sick of the notion, that a civilization's only purpose is to fit a role in multiplayer. I understand the need to keep the game balanced, but an underpowered civ that nobody uses competitively also does no harm to competitive play IMO. I do absolutely believe that their niche will be found, but I would much rather have them useless in the game than not in the game at all.Yes but why expend any energy tweaking them when they could simply be deleted instead?
As I have said earlier if Burgundians and Sicilians were added as SP only variations/combination on the existing civs that already well represent their respective polity then there would be much less to complain about them.Then we would lose the very fun new campaigns, beautiful models and animations for castles, wonders and unique units and some of the best voice work this game has ever had. Balance is not the only thing that makes this game enjoyable and I'm a bit sick of the notion, that a civilization's only purpose is to fit a role in multiplayer. I understand the need to keep the game balanced, but an underpowered civ that nobody uses competitively also does no harm to competitive play IMO. I do absolutely believe that their niche will be found, but I would much rather have them useless in the game than not in the game at all.