The Romans, so well known for their horsemen. The centurion beating almost all paladins but in the same time, Persians are still waiting for a really powerful cavalry unit.
Persian cavalry is represented by their Paladins, all blacksmith upgrades, Bloodlines, Husbandry, and their special team bonus which gives +2 bonus damage against archers for knights. It admittedly requires some imagination. However, in Bukhara scenario, optional cavalry units called Savarans are available, and pretty fun.
Persians could have 40% discount on their stable techs if they really emphasis on being a cavalry civ. They only have 2 civ bonuses and one of them is a measly head start in resources. Mahouts could rework as war elephants become cheaper and techs affecting them are research faster.
@@ville4090 I like the idea that Mahouts is just folded into Elite Elephants cost and that it could be replaced with a tech called "Savaram" or something that gives a +1/+1 to "all mounted units, including elephants" or something. I don't mind them only having 2 eco bonuses considering that they are quite strong ones.
@@DCdabest i like your theory replacing mahouts. Also, any suggestions to replace bearded axe for franks since axemen are only used against ram pushes and for supporting castle drops.
I know right, and the best part about the centurion is that he is on horseback in a fight to begin with. Not like the centurions lead from the front on foot and there was this entire social class on horseback called the Equitae mainly consisting of roman nobles.
@@stefanandrejcik571 That is factually wrong. Centurions were not merely "allowed" horses. Centurions were REQUIRED to be able to ride. BUT they were not supposed to ride into battle, the ability to ride alongside the requirement for being literate was for relaying orders. In a roman battleformation the Centurion was ON FOOT leading his century from the front. Matter of fact the centurion was the only roman soldier not swapping in battle and always being in the thick of it since he was in charge of swapping the contuberniums in battle when the front row tired themselves out.
@@dungvuanh6417 personally would love that but definitely not, they would be number 1 again but would nmbe too op, they would be able to tank 71arrows instead of current 64 which is still 4 more than normal paladin and even halbs would need 6hits to kill them
Not even a chainmail, but a lorica segmentata, which has many weak points, covers much less of the body, leaves joints exposed, and is made of bronze and iron instead of steel. The Paladin would have far superior armor and weapons made of steel. A common misconception is that civilization just stagnated (or regressed) during the Middle Ages. While much of the Classical culture was lost during the tumultuous early Middle Ages, the High and Late Middle Ages saw significant advances in both culture and technology. A late medieval knight (which the Paladin represents) would have far superior custom-made armor and weapons than any soldier from Classical Antiquity. Not to mention that Late Medieval armor was so good that the Europeans developed specialized martial arts to combat enemies who would wear them. The Centurion wouldn't even know where to strike the Paladin because the Paladin's armor has covered (yet flexible) joints and virtually no weak points.
I like centurions as much as the next guy, but there is no universe a Paladin should ever lose here. Historically speaking, Paladins are better in just about every way.
Historically speaking paladins were simple Charlemagne's body guardsmen. If you refer to french Knights, well, depends, high Imperial army was heavy infantry capable of resisting cavalry charges, and late Imperial focused on heavy cavalry too.
however, I've been facing them in Alaric maps... and they fall quite easy against pikeman, I guess that's why they need several Legionaires along with them however I see them falling against Cataphracts in similar numbers, for area damage
No bloodlines is shockingly bad. They still kick ass on Arabia 1v1 , probably because of fast Castle and slightly better knights than everybody else but that's about it.
They still have +2 line of sight as well as 40% faster creation with UT, and 2 fitting eco bonuses for cavalry play and also saving resources on bloodlines so in practice they’re pretty much the strongest one still. Teuton knights as slow as fuck and way worse vs archer, Lithuanian only has a chance if you get 4 relics. 40% creation speed is nothing to sneeze at, you can reinforce the paladin spam way easier, and basically works as a pop limit bonus since they don’t have to be in que for so long.
@@edwardblom2661 Thing is that the extra creation speed is decent super late. Early imp it does not play that big of a role because eco may still be the bottleneck. Engaging the teuton player’s paladin in early imp is risky for the franks player, although by the time the franks are ready to stop running and engage, the teutons have already teched into counters. I just get a sour taste in my mouth thinking that the franks paladin need to be scared of other civs’ paladins - It’s a good thing though, franks are brutal early game.
I thought that at first, but then... do they? There are other unique cavs who beat paladins, like boyars and leitis, no? True that boyars and leitis are way weaker to archers than paladins, while centurions are not... but maybe its ok since romans dont have a great stable cavalry in late game. They have like 3 good unit options: legionary, scorpions and centurions. No bombard cannons, no good skirms, no hand cannoneers.. maybe they need a very strong cavalry unit to compensate? Many factors to consider.
@@quecobpt bro, charged attack and beefy as hell, they shouldn't even be a cavilary unit since they were infantry in real life. A support unit should be a bit weaker.
@@perrypougins379 generic Cavalier nowadays even lose to elite woad raiders after this patch, with same resource. Their charge attack is a buff but doesn't make them op cav units😂
Adding new civs is shit but making an older civ like romans literally killing the realistic side of aoe... i stoped playing aoe2, i wont pay a single peny for a new civ, aoe has never needed new civs. I dont want to see a new "broken balance" rts each patch
No one expects the game to be 100% accurate but adding Rome really lacks imagination and is just pandering. Genoese crossbowman will now fight mounted Roman centurions. How utterly stupid.
have people been bothered about historical accuracy ever? Like the fact that most factions have cloned units isn't already enough to show that historical accuracy was never what they were going for? Or you know everyone basically having christian monks that convert units and heal then from range with magic?
The Romans, so well known for their horsemen. The centurion beating almost all paladins but in the same time, Persians are still waiting for a really powerful cavalry unit.
They got that elephant.
Persian cavalry is represented by their Paladins, all blacksmith upgrades, Bloodlines, Husbandry, and their special team bonus which gives +2 bonus damage against archers for knights.
It admittedly requires some imagination. However, in Bukhara scenario, optional cavalry units called Savarans are available, and pretty fun.
Persians could have 40% discount on their stable techs if they really emphasis on being a cavalry civ. They only have 2 civ bonuses and one of them is a measly head start in resources. Mahouts could rework as war elephants become cheaper and techs affecting them are research faster.
@@ville4090
I like the idea that Mahouts is just folded into Elite Elephants cost and that it could be replaced with a tech called "Savaram" or something that gives a +1/+1 to "all mounted units, including elephants" or something.
I don't mind them only having 2 eco bonuses considering that they are quite strong ones.
@@DCdabest i like your theory replacing mahouts. Also, any suggestions to replace bearded axe for franks since axemen are only used against ram pushes and for supporting castle drops.
I love that the Centurion has stirrups
I know right, and the best part about the centurion is that he is on horseback in a fight to begin with. Not like the centurions lead from the front on foot and there was this entire social class on horseback called the Equitae mainly consisting of roman nobles.
@@schullerandreas556 centurions were on horse lmao, they literally have been allowed to ride horses
@@stefanandrejcik571 That is factually wrong. Centurions were not merely "allowed" horses. Centurions were REQUIRED to be able to ride. BUT they were not supposed to ride into battle, the ability to ride alongside the requirement for being literate was for relaying orders. In a roman battleformation the Centurion was ON FOOT leading his century from the front. Matter of fact the centurion was the only roman soldier not swapping in battle and always being in the thick of it since he was in charge of swapping the contuberniums in battle when the front row tired themselves out.
@@schullerandreas556 then again I don't find it to be bad, from game aspect having centurion as another infantry unit would be stupid and unlikable
both have, rigth?
The Paladin and the Centurion : fight to their death
The horses they are riding : 😦😦
Lithuanians Paladin With 4 relic still beast
Кароче минусов не нашёл крутой ролик
Too strong
OP AS FUCK
why is the result the same against frank and generic paladins? shouldnt franks get at least an extra hit?
12 extra health isn't enough for hit 1 more
Centurion deal 19 damage again paladin so 12 extra HP is ... nothing
thanks guys, i didn't notice it was so little more hp in a frank pala vs bloodlines pala
like wow, that buff seems weak sometimes
@@Booklat1best we can do is hope someday they'll give Frank Bloodline tech
@@dungvuanh6417 personally would love that but definitely not, they would be number 1 again but would nmbe too op, they would be able to tank 71arrows instead of current 64 which is still 4 more than normal paladin and even halbs would need 6hits to kill them
It looks very stupid, Paladin in full plate armour lossing to a centurion in chainmail….
do not speak those words of reason when discussing AOK logic.
AoE2 isn't historically accurate at all.
Not even a chainmail, but a lorica segmentata, which has many weak points, covers much less of the body, leaves joints exposed, and is made of bronze and iron instead of steel. The Paladin would have far superior armor and weapons made of steel.
A common misconception is that civilization just stagnated (or regressed) during the Middle Ages. While much of the Classical culture was lost during the tumultuous early Middle Ages, the High and Late Middle Ages saw significant advances in both culture and technology. A late medieval knight (which the Paladin represents) would have far superior custom-made armor and weapons than any soldier from Classical Antiquity.
Not to mention that Late Medieval armor was so good that the Europeans developed specialized martial arts to combat enemies who would wear them. The Centurion wouldn't even know where to strike the Paladin because the Paladin's armor has covered (yet flexible) joints and virtually no weak points.
@@cfbana nadie le importa cerra el orto
How about Centurion vs Bulgarians's Paladin?
Bulgarians can't access the Paladin
@@Walenaoe:O sorry I didn't know that.
@@lygiaquan937 no problem
mike empires 2.0
I like centurions as much as the next guy, but there is no universe a Paladin should ever lose here. Historically speaking, Paladins are better in just about every way.
Historically speaking paladins were simple Charlemagne's body guardsmen. If you refer to french Knights, well, depends, high Imperial army was heavy infantry capable of resisting cavalry charges, and late Imperial focused on heavy cavalry too.
AoE2 isn't meant to be historically accurate. Just a fun medieval RTS game.
Song name?
first: romans theme aoe2
second: lithuanians theme aoe2
Is this a real battle
Nice is Romans in this game
lmao, for some reason you need the best paladin in the game to be able to 1 on 1 some units that for 500 b.C. where long gone... xD
however, I've been facing them in Alaric maps... and they fall quite easy against pikeman, I guess that's why they need several Legionaires along with them
however I see them falling against Cataphracts in similar numbers, for area damage
The Frank paladin has become a joke.
it sadly has. The entire Civ is balanced around it and its not even in the top 5 heavy cav units anymore
@@schullerandreas556 Their paladins only loose against the teutons’ and Lithuanians’ no? But the lack of hussar is kinda lame
No bloodlines is shockingly bad. They still kick ass on Arabia 1v1 , probably because of fast Castle and slightly better knights than everybody else but that's about it.
They still have +2 line of sight as well as 40% faster creation with UT, and 2 fitting eco bonuses for cavalry play and also saving resources on bloodlines so in practice they’re pretty much the strongest one still.
Teuton knights as slow as fuck and way worse vs archer, Lithuanian only has a chance if you get 4 relics.
40% creation speed is nothing to sneeze at, you can reinforce the paladin spam way easier, and basically works as a pop limit bonus since they don’t have to be in que for so long.
@@edwardblom2661 Thing is that the extra creation speed is decent super late. Early imp it does not play that big of a role because eco may still be the bottleneck.
Engaging the teuton player’s paladin in early imp is risky for the franks player, although by the time the franks are ready to stop running and engage, the teutons have already teched into counters.
I just get a sour taste in my mouth thinking that the franks paladin need to be scared of other civs’ paladins - It’s a good thing though, franks are brutal early game.
Now do savar
🙄
Yeah centurion need nerfs
I thought that at first, but then... do they? There are other unique cavs who beat paladins, like boyars and leitis, no?
True that boyars and leitis are way weaker to archers than paladins, while centurions are not... but maybe its ok since romans dont have a great stable cavalry in late game. They have like 3 good unit options: legionary, scorpions and centurions. No bombard cannons, no good skirms, no hand cannoneers.. maybe they need a very strong cavalry unit to compensate?
Many factors to consider.
@@quecobpt bro, charged attack and beefy as hell, they shouldn't even be a cavilary unit since they were infantry in real life. A support unit should be a bit weaker.
@@quecobpt also their knights gain charged attack with their unique upgrade, so they have some use as well
@@perrypougins379 generic Cavalier nowadays even lose to elite woad raiders after this patch, with same resource. Their charge attack is a buff but doesn't make them op cav units😂
@@mjloh not saying they are op, but centurions definitivly need a nerf.
What a horrible unit design, and overall poor civ design.
But we're such a good fanboys, we don't even mind.
Adding new civs is shit but making an older civ like romans literally killing the realistic side of aoe... i stoped playing aoe2, i wont pay a single peny for a new civ, aoe has never needed new civs. I dont want to see a new "broken balance" rts each patch
I don't know why Italians, Sicilians, Byzantines, and Romans are all present in the same game.
No one expects the game to be 100% accurate but adding Rome really lacks imagination and is just pandering. Genoese crossbowman will now fight mounted Roman centurions. How utterly stupid.
@@willmunny9279 exactly
have people been bothered about historical accuracy ever? Like the fact that most factions have cloned units isn't already enough to show that historical accuracy was never what they were going for? Or you know everyone basically having christian monks that convert units and heal then from range with magic?
@@Walenaoe well, same could go for AoE1, you get hyttites and greeks, when they barely meeted each other in timeline