I don't agree at all. The "new" civs from all the expansions are great. Not all of them are amazing or super unique, but overall it's amazing to have so much more variety, even if just for random civ matches (eg Viper plays random civ all the time), drafting /bans etc.
I also completely disagree with you on certain OP aspects of a civ. It doesn't matter at all if one single aspect of a civ is OP. The only thing that counts is whether the civ overall is OP or not.
Most civs have features that on their own could be considered very strong. It seems to me that whenever a player loses to one of these aspects, he believes that it's just some sort of undeserved civ win.
But that's actually completely wrong. Aoe2 isn't just about the best macro and micro, it is also very much about maximizing your own civ advantage and minimizing your opponent. That's what keeps the game interesting and diverse. If you let your lith or azt opponent get 5 relics while you didn't use your own civ advantages (eg OP conqs, strong archers or whatever), don't complain if you lose.
I also completely disagree with you on certain OP aspects of a civ. It doesn't matter at all if one single aspect of a civ is OP. The only thing that counts is whether the civ overall is OP or not.
Most civs have features that on their own could be considered very strong. It seems to me that whenever a player loses to one of these aspects, he believes that it's just some sort of undeserved civ win.
But that's actually completely wrong. Aoe2 isn't just about the best macro and micro, it is also very much about maximizing your own civ advantage and minimizing your opponent. That's what keeps the game interesting and diverse. If you let your lith or azt opponent get 5 relics while you didn't use your own civ advantages (eg OP conqs, strong archers or whatever), don't complain if you lose.