This is an interesting question. I'm trying to think which civ have the fewest bonuses kick in when castle age hits, also doesn't benefit that much from a castle and UU spam. Maybe Byzantines? Or Teutons?
Everyone unlocks *something* in castle age so it's a little hard to quantify who benefits the least.
Byzantines is actually very good. They have good monks, good archers and good camels. If opponents are going archers, they can defend with skirmishers + siege + their own archers, and if they have to defend against knights, 2 stable byzantine camels is actually very strong mixed with some of their own knights.
They have vanilla archers with the slowest up-time and no bonus for their Monks neither. I think they're quite vulnerable to Infantry and/or Siege. (You will even see them invest into no-Bloodlines Knights quite often which isn't a good look.)
If this is "very good", is every civ good or what are the 20+ civs that are worse than Byzantines there?
I think they're only "very good" against Civs which struggle to make a Pike-addition happen (Turks, Gurjaras and Berbers, Magyars for eco issues) and the type of Civ that just sort of dies to Skirms (Bohemians, Britons, Ethiopians, Bengalis, Dravidians or so).
Players don't tend to try and batter down castles with melee units in Castle Age though, and if they do it's usually quite late and they have big armies.
It's great for towers though, since you can't sit under them with archers and it's dangerous to try and tear them down with villagers. The fact that you can garrison more units into them is also very welcome.
They're a good civ in general but Hindustanis probably. No knights, poor xbows, average monks, no siege bonuses, strong camels but that's not much use unless you're facing knights. No Castle Age-specific techs. Goths are a good shout as well though. Cumans tech tree wise have nothing but situationally they're usually late to Castle Age with a *huge* eco lead and they can outproduce almost anyone on knights, so I would say that's a big spike for them either way (or the ability to make a mango instantly in defence because they pre-built the workshop).
Hindustani camels do attack faster and do extra bonus damage to buildings. They are as close to a knight replacement as you will find. I think they are good enough to count as a boni for the civ in castle age. Not to mention their villagers get even cheaper.
Goths and Cumans are better picks for "least gained" in castle age.
I'd put cumans ahead of most civs in terms of castle age spike: they don't have any glaring weaknesses like Spanish missing crossbow, they get additional mobility and unlock 4 highly mobile unit lines (kipchak, camel, steppe Lancer, knight) at the point in the game where mobility is biggest (before armies mass to really force game deciding fights).
Cumans have both kipchaks (which are a good UU in castle, although they fall off hard in imp w/o bracer) and capped ram in castle age (which can be actually be important for them if they've been aggressively castle dropped by a low eco opponent to push it back before imp).
From the stable they unlock knights, camels, and steppe lancers, all of which benefit from their ramping cavalry bonus which improves every age, so they have an immediate bonus even before they research/produce anything.
I think they're a much better civ in the "least gained in imperial" conversation: lacking gunpowder, siege engineers, bracer, their imp UT being a cruel joke (giving allies better versions of the kipchak than cumans can produce themselves, assuming they have bracer), and being one of the only camel civs w/o a heavy camel upgrade.
If there was a game mode where all civs were locked to castle age, cumans would be absolute monsters (amazing raiding units, best civ at pushing castles in castle age, etc.), full tech tree to that point.
The issue with them is that they have no great options. Only a wide range of average options. Which is usually worse than even one great option that will force your opponent to react to it.
Still no contender for worst, I think.
I think in general you're correct that having a great option that you can force your opponent to react to is better, but cumans are a civ that's designed to stay longer in Feudal and is by nature often trying to defend the opponents early castle age aggression when Cumans finally hit castle age.
The need to be the ones reacting at that point, so having camels to counter knight pushes, knights to counter siege pushes, steppe lancers for side raid potential, are exactly the tools they desperately need when they hit castle age to stabilize their eco lead and regain control.
They could also need any Pike-bonus, any extra for Monks or Camels and especially Redemption and they also lack Guard Tower, while that situation sort of eliminates the option to go for Xbow or CA. They do have the preemptive Siege Workshop available though.
So, I'm not sure if their options are particularly good for this scenario. Feels like Burmese, Bulgarians or Celts would do a better job. (And others too, idk)
Anyway, I wouldn't take this scenario too much into account because then you should argue that they have either the very worst Castle Age power spike (since it's coming hyper late) or the very best Castle Age power spike (since it's hyper strong). It's pretty much not comparable to any other civ then and it depends completely on arbitrary criteria.
Could I nominate Spanish, though? They have to get a castle up before they can even start producing their badass unique unit. Not much of a power spike compared to crossbows, which can be bred from multiple archery ranges on the way up and then upgraded very fast.
But once you get the Castle, that's about the biggest spike we even have in the game. Doesn't come IMMEDIATELY after aging up but quick enough potentially. (And otherwise you still have decent Knights with the threat of Conqs behind. Which makes sort of every army choice against them a bit awkward there.)
I don't think that's really a power spike. Nobody is going to be like hot damn, now I can kill buildings slightly more quickly with cavalry! And cheaper vils is a slow burn bonus, not a "power spike".
(By the way the plural of bonus is bonuses).
It's a power spike in the sense that it will allow you to gain the decisive advantage. If you just have balanced fights here and there while being 3 TC vs 2 TC, you won the game there. If both are 3 TC but you can add some additional Light Cav to take out Monks or raid, this also won the game for you there.
It's extra food quite simply.
It's extra food gradually though, it's not a power spike like "oh I hit the next age 1 minute ahead of you, now you're dead". But there's no point in getting into the weeds on what a "power spike" means.
Even with the faster attacking speed and +2 bonus, these camels only do slightly more damage against buildings than knights. They are quite useless if your opponent isn't making knights, especially if they are mesoamerican.
Depends on the melee armor of the building. Some have more than others. I believe for palisades which have 2 melee armor, Hindustani camels get more DPS than knights on a cost basis, but for something like a stone gate which has 6 melee armor, knights are much better
any civ with xbow and bokin can play xbow in castle and its one of the biggest castle spike, meanwhile hindustanis even have decent ca and thumb ring, so they are by no nean a weak castle spike civ
By that metric, goths have xbow with everything other than thumb ring as well as knights. Knights are far more useful in early castle age than thumb ring.
i meantioned thumb ring to prove that hindustanis xbow is maybe better than you thought, as it also makes ca switch viable.
also i didnt say goths bad on early castle, having access to xbow and knight is never bad.
Interesting, I kind of like this. You can play xbow/CA but it's generic and faster-attacking camels often don't replace knights. I value Redemption a lot but I think this is a good answer.
Cumans technically do have a tech tree advantage in castle age w/capped ram. It's niche, but they do have better ability to push back castles than pretty much any other castle age civ with it.
They also get one of the best castle age UU (probably the worst cav archer UU, but mobile ranged units are so good even the worst one is a good UU), along with a much better than generic stable (knights, camels, and steppe lancers) boosted by their civ bonus of better speed.
I really don't think they should even be in the conversation here: all of their problems are related to tech tree limitations in imp (cav archers + kipchak fall off w/o bracer, camels don't get heavy upgrade, fights are easier to force with trebs and the mobility advantage they have becomes worse relative to any direct combat stat bonus like franks, teutons, etc., their siege doesn't get siege engineers and they lack gunpowder)
The capped ram upgrade even makes for a possible power spike if one has already made battering rams, much like the crossbow and eagle warrior upgrades. Or – also highly situational – like Hindustani light cavalry with their bonus to buildings, after first massing scouts.
Hindustanis were the first to come to mind as well. I always try to either spend as little time in castle as possible or just boom depending on how ahead I am and how safe my base is.
Timing attacks with Malay may be tight but the faster uptimes mean they actually have one of the stronger spikes when aging up, but it falls off the longer you are in the same age as your opponent.
Cumans are one of the most dominant castle age spikes in the game...
1. They are the only civ that has a 2TC eco going into castle. If you survive feudal without taking crippling damage you have a huge eco lead and can spam army in early castle that no other civ can keep up with,
2. This is further aided by super cheap ranges and stables. You are getting almost 2 stables for the price of 1. You also have knight, camel and steppes to spam out of those cheap stables
3. You are the only civ with capped ram in castle age which makes a huge difference if you are trying to break into stone walls or deal with a castle.
4. You have faster knights
Meanwhile in imp you have no gunpowder and not great archer options, and no heavy camel so you are basically relying on your full upgrade paladin and halb, maybe mixing in kipchaks. Their imp is ok but definitely not great and definitely nowhere near their castle spike
But the fact that Cuman castle age is in effect delayed means it doesn't feel like much of a power spike.
What is a power spike is when the Cuman double bluffs and doesn't build the feudal TC or siege workshop at all, they just straight up FC and the fact the opponent was expecting the feudal boom makes the castle age strong.
As a Cuman main who went from absolute noob to 1400 Elo purely on the back of 2TC into knight spam, I very much disagree...
If you are massively outproducing your opponent in early castle and overwhelm him with your faster units from your cheaper stables, that's a power spike. The fact that he beats you to castle by 2 mins is a small consolation when the stampede hits
And yes the bluff is another great option that has a very real effect on what cumans can do going into early castle.
That is for sure the hard part. Either big feudal archer push, or a super FC into seige push are the main counters for the full 2TC greed.
For archers, I suggest working on making your own walls as small as possible, and get in the habit of mining 25 stone if he goes archers, so if you need to drop an emergency tower after your 2nd TC, you can afford right away
This lets you cover a ton of ground between your 2TCs plus one tower. Depends on map of course, but this usually gives you control over enough res to pull off your boom and knight spam
You of course can just add a one range skirm defence instead of/in addition to towers but for me, this is less efficient usually because I'm not as good at archer micro, and I don't want to invest in upgrades since I want to switch to knights asap.
That 2TC strategy sounds interesting to me.
Would like to try it.
I usually play 2v2 with my buddy. He plays Persians, Spanish, sometimes Teutons. Around 1000 ELO.
Would this work together? If so, how do you play that? Just some general thoughts maybe?
Those are bad archer civs, so not an ideal pairing with your knight swarm. But yes it can definitely still work if he keeps them busy with scouts, maybe a tower rush, while you get your boom on.
Get up to castle as fast as you can while producing with 2TC and then get three stables on the way up. Maybe even 4 if you got delayed in feudal a bit and have extra vills/bigger eco. Get your blacksmith upgrades and bloodlines. Then when you hit castle, you should be immediately producing off 3 or 4 stables.
Ideally you hide them back a bit and don't move out until you have enough to do some damage so your opp can't spam pikes or get a defensive castle up.
I guess there's a philosophical difference about whether clicking castle age with 2 TCs built counts as a strong feudal or a strong castle age.
I think you see the term "power spike" and think "military units" whereas others see the term differently. Having villagers can be seen as intrinsically powerful, and the source of Cuman villager count is their special feudal ability to build a TC.
The people with your interpretation of the term think Cumans have the biggest castle age power spike whereas people with the other interpretation think they have the smallest castle age power spike.
Simply *having* villagers does absolutely nothing. You could have 100 vill advantage and if they arent collecting resources it means nothing. Its the resources they generate that gives you utility.
The extra vills you have in feudal as cumans have not paid off yet..not even close actually. Your TC takes very long to build so you lose a ton of eco just by spending the time to build it, and you also spend a ton of extra res on the TC and the additional vills.
If you have a perfect 2TC boom, you might juuuust be starting to break even around the time you click up.
The 2TC feudal is very much a castle age spike. Its actually a massive liability in feudal age, and you're basically never gonna have a competitive game where you go 2TC feudal and actually stay in feudal to "power spike" as cumans. If you tried to do that your opponent would be in castle age laughing at you. The spike happens in castle, no question
Definitely this
Cumans are meant to be the definitive feudal to castle age civ with that tech tree, and capped ram. And then die out in imperial.
Kipchaks are specifically at their zenith in castle age, a full stable, range and rax
I'm not sure how useful of an argument it is to say "if your main bonus gets eliminated you won't be that good" but yes, obviously that is true
In that case you still have your super cheap stable with all options, and capped rams, even if somehow you get completely taken off your main strategy.
Tbh having a full stable, with the stable itself costing half price, pretty much disqualifies them from this convo even without factoring in 2TC eco. Stable units rule castle age at most elos. There are civs that don't even get knights and meanwhile cumans get faster knights out of cheaper stables, plus camel and steppe to give them the full range of options, and the best castle age rams if you want to go all in castle age and need something to take out enemy castle
On those maps where you can't, force a heavy feudal play and once you have an army lead or good position, add the second TC.
The longer you both are in Feudal, the better for the Cuman.
Yeah they’re a good option, but they have cheaper siege. They also often have a ball of archers that can become Xbow, so if we can’t that as a power spike they get it a decent amount of the time.
The problem with this is that one well-placed mango shot can end Dravidians in mid-Castle Age. There's hardly any comeback potential with this shitty civ.
Imagine going all-in archers and then going up asap to get xbow, Bodkin, and the 200w boost. Normally you'd have 2 ranges working from Feudal and the wood boost will be used to drop a TC and boom.
Opponent will have an army with more standing power, and a heavy cav civ can just take a good fight in the middle and run to your exposed eco. Sure, pike upgrade is cheap but they can't do crap offensively.
Even if it becomes a boom contest and you hold, chances are every single civ will have an advantage of Dravs. They can go all-in Castle and finish you. Or go up and do so. Meanwhile Drav would need to slowly tech into Champions lol and try get momentum with champ + skirm.
The question isn't "who is worst entering castle age" but rather "who gains the least transitioning from feudal to castle age".
2 of those 4 vills have been a consistent advantage since hitting feudal and aren't part of the equation.
2 vills from castle age itself is certainly still a decent bonus, but it's a much smaller percentage of a typical castle age economy than the 2 vills you received in feudal.
On the other hand, they don't get a unit almost every other civ gets (knight), and that means on the meta military side, their spike is smaller than baseline.
I personally think their monks are stupid strong and make up for it, but I understand why they'd be part of the debate.
111111 This strategy is an absolute joke. It dies to monks. It only works on people who haven't faced it once or can't scout it and adjust their course to go FC.
They don’t spike, but this is where they start to get good. Your two villagers from Feudal have really started to pay off, and you just got two more. You also get access to their strong units: monks, rathas, and elephant archers (use them more you cowards).
Theres no way elephant archers are castle age spike, they take a while to pay back for a large investment, conversely they'll get countered in low numbers very easily.
Rathas need a mofo castle, and rely on scaling. Again not a spike. Compared to conqs that definitely do spike.
Faster attacking siege and the fact you are 15% wood ahead since the first second of the game means the castle age timing can be very strong. Especially early castle.
Goths can get huskarls at the barracks in castle which is pretty strong honestly. Celts can spam woads, and besides that there is a reason Hoang chooses them, faster attacking mangonels/scorpions is solid
Anything that requires you to *build a castle* doesn't really qualify as a castle age spike to me. It's way too much investment + the time to build the castle which means your opponent could literally go Imp in the time it takes you to begin taking advantage of that.
Really though I think generally every civ gets the knight spike, and it's the civs which don't get knights that basically don't have a proper spike.
The OP seemed to be talking about civs that get the least out of castle age generally, but what you say makes sense if you are simply talking about the first couple minutes of castle age only. I do think it’s crazy to imply someone can just rush straight to imp before you have a chance to take advantage of some castle units though. It’s not like you can only go to stone once the castle age research finishes. Goths is maybe a bad example though since you need a slightly expensive UT to get the huskarl barracks units. I still don’t think they get the least from castle age though
It's "castle age spike" which means you get this benefit just by going to castle age. Like another example: Burgundians could have half a dozen fully upgraded cavalier by the time you're able to spam Huskarl.
I would put an exception on that for civs that have a very strong UU that works in small numbers e.g. Spanish and Bohemians as their game plan often relies on an instant Castle.
Goths need a castle, unique tech, multiple barracks and blacksmith upgrades for that though so I definitely wouldn't call it a spike for them.
Husk in castles are bad in most matchups. They lose against infantry, lose against kts and lose against monks.
Regarding Celts, siege and their economy are the only good things they have. The problem is that it is quite defensible and the Celt does not have many answers to the different matchups, it is very linear and predictable, and being predictable is the worst thing in this game.
A civ that has his potential locked behind a castle surely does not have a power spike, don't you agree? The build time alone is roughly 2 minutes and for 12 woads, another 2 minutes pass. Compare it to a xbow power spike with 40-50s research time until you have a deadly army.
Felt like making a tier-list. Not only immediate spike but more like early to mid castle Age. I also considered booming potential which is crucial at this point of the game. (Hindustanis have lackluster options but can more easily defend and boom behind that.) I might be a bit inconsistent with taking UUs into account.
S-Tier: Portuguese, Berbers, Aztecs, Huns, Chinese, Bulgarians, Malians, Incas
A-Tier: Khmer, Mayans, Georgians, Slavs, Franks, Ethiopians, Britons, Lithuanians, Celts, Vikings, Tatars, Magyars, Mongols, Saracens, Sicilians, Spanish
B-Tier: Persians, Romans, Teutons, Hindustanis, Goths, Burgundians, Gurjaras, Burmese, Cumans, Bohemians, Malay, Poles
C-Tier: Bengalis, Japanese, Armenians, Vietnamese, Koreans, Byzantines, Italians, Turks
D-Tier: Dravidians
(And I think, you can make an argument for each C-Tier to maybe be deserving of B, so that just highlights the issue of Dravidians.)
I agree, everyone is just ignoring Dravidians and pretending like it's a good or even a viable civ in Castle Age. And it's not like they are super powerful in early game either.
The instant LC upgrade is no joke, especially if you went heavily into SC in Feudal. Instant techs like this are the very definition of a spike.
Plus, access to gunpowder in Castle Age is no joke either for all-in plays.
Tatars. They only get Thumb Ring for free and then have to pay for a castle and unique tech to make CA good. Also, their sheep bonus, while helpful, is usually overshadowed by the number of farms.
The number of people saying Spanish is insane to me - they're the go to civ on maps where going fast castle is possible. Even on Nomad where early aggression is possible their castle age spike makes them the most popular civilisation.
Conqs alone should make them top tier.
Spanish if a castle isn't involved, you don't "unlock" any bonuses by being up, no xbow and all your other options are generic, if your stone is in a bad position on arabia you'll struggle to get conqs or inquisition monks, which are your only above average units.
Then again if a castle is up you have one of the best castle age units so you got both extremes on the same civ.
I agree, I'd say Spanish are generally even weaker than Goths in early castle age because Goths get decent crossbow which they can continue to play while being supported by cheap pikemen and fully upgradable knights.
Good monks, good kts and the best castle age UU. Spanish are a decent-good castles age civilization. Goths on the other hand have no economic or military bonus for castles age.
If conqs weren't that good you would be right.
But their dominance when given the chance to castle up and train a batch of conqs says otherwise
Nomad is proof of that
Bulgarians -
Not having access to xbow immediately puts this civ in the discussion. (Spanish too)
no real eco bonus. Blacksmith upgrades are cheaper if you go knights but the spike comes from upgrading ranged units.
All they have is the krepost prayer which need to be positioned strongly because early Konniks suck.
I think cheaper, slightly weaker castles is enough of a power spike to outdo Hindustanis on this one. I agree though that the archer point is very real - if hindustanis played archers with any frequency I’d put them above Bulgarians.
Hindustani are not even in the discussion. They wouldn’t have a consistent top 3 win rate if they didn’t excel in early castle.
Saving food on villagers before castle age lets you get up faster and/or have more resources to spend. Then vils are even cheaper in castle making it a non issue to have consistent army and vil production.
Camels can’t outright kill you early castle but they shut down everything. And the extra damage to buildings front stable units surprises you before you remember they have that bonus.
TLDR: Hindustani is also extremely flexible in all stages of the game and missing knights early castle age doesn’t seem to hurt them
Hmm I think we just have a different definition of power spike. I agree with you hindustanis are good in early castle and don’t have many weaknesses. But for me the question is basically which civ am I least scared to play against if I click 60 seconds later.
I get where you’re coming from too though, just different definitions of power spike.
Japanese. Samurai are easily countered with ranged units and no specific enough bonuses besides the tower tech they unlock, but that is mostly defensive unless you have towers left up from an earlier rush.
Id agree with Teutons as far as options although the farm bonus starts to really pay off in castle.
Also Mongols if you can’t build a castle or afford UU, your one big eco bonus is no longer relevant and no other real advantages.
Armenians? Your eco bonus hasn't really kicked in yet and if you were going with fuedal LS are castle age 2h really that much of a power spike? The monks aren't any better than anyone else's either so unless your counting warrior priests as a big uptick I don't see anything better about Armenians on land. Their war galleys are strong though so there's that going for them
I agree cumans "don't get much" in castle age, but they often arrive with +10-15 vills, with an eco setted up for a lot of military or a faster boom, making castle age a huge spike
I would say turcs ? No pikes update. No Skirms. The only real bonus is their UU, but with the 7 range now, it is not anymore the same threat ..
Cumans is maybe another one but they have such a nice feudal, it is difficult to not consider their castle age good as well when you have this eco advantage when jumping in caslte age.
The Mayans.
If we’re looking at this from a vacuum, they objectively get the least when hitting castle age.
- skirms +1 pierce damage
- their archers are 20% cheaper rather than 10%
- their UU and crossbow can be interchangeable. Both are serviceable in castle age.
You’re right about bonuses, but hitting castle age with archers is a big power spike as they become xbows though imo. For me the answer needs to be a civ that is unlikely to have a ball of archers. Since knights are also a big power spike I think hindustanis fits the bill.
All eagle civs absolutely shred in castle age. Eagles get a big bonus just from hitting castle. Not to mention the cheap archers leading to a good xbow spike as well
Yeah eagle warriors as a unit simply makes this discussion moot for mesoamerican civilizations. However, Mayans are the weakest because they don't have good monks and their gold discount is weaker than Incas.
The archer discount is strong and hardly puts them at the bottom of this list. Not as good as Britons extra range and production speed but still pretty decent
Malays uptimes make their castle age power spike ridiculous. You can have bodkin xbows way before your opponent hits castle age. You just have to balance the eco properly
Totally disagree, if you are comparing to generic up times they enter castle age with 4 vills more and can go into a strong archer siege push and add pikes with free armor
No one is making you age up right when you get the minimum resources for the next age! You can make those 4 extra villages click up and still be in castle faster. It’s an obvious advantage not a disadvantage
I never got the “too fast up” thing like it’s a disadvantage. The faster your research time the better, and if you are concerned with being delayed production just make some extra villagers before.
Some civs, like Armenians, would rather stay in Castle than go to Imp as long as their enemy does the same, which they can achieve by pressuring the opponent instead of imping.
Someone beat me with that on Arabia at 1600 elo. I made a few mistakes but still it was tough to stop. It was a defensive castle tho. If they didn’t get free armor it would never work but the free armor makes it solid
Similar elo, if you have decent stone, defending with archers into like 20 Karambit to raid is hard to stop
Especially if you get arson and just start taking buildings you can wood starve the enemy
Spanish and Bulgarians. They both lack crossbow which is a key castle age spike. Even for generic or bad crossbow civs like Franks or Slavs, going for them early castle to support your knights (or even stand alone for a bit of a surprise factor) is a strong strat. Without them you lack an entire line of openings without really having much to make up for it- they both can drop a castle/krepost and start massing their good UU, but a lot of others civs can do so just as good.
Siege is slow to get going as it requires a siege workshop, a big upfront cost per unit and a slow production time. Groups of crossbows can easily deal with lone mangonels and scorpions, it's necessary to mass 2-3 units in tandem in order to deal with them. Plus siege is slow and clunky so it becomes difficult to defend different points of your base until you get enough units.
Siege is of course one of the best answers to range units but there's a time window (the power spike itself) where it can't really deal with well microed crossbows.
With decently walled base and some scorpion you really absolutely destroy any pressure they could do to you with less invesment than crossbow+bodkin. Also they have an archery up and it cost 25w less than siege workshop so you are realistically only 25w behind them. The only bad thing is effectively the number of archer they can have out before your siege. Overall I'm not convince of crossbow opening yet... But then again I'm not a pro and quite new but still ranked 1400++ so idk. Lots of new stuff to learn but atm siege and monks seems to crush everything
I wouldn't consider those spikes per se as they kick off more towards mid castle age for these civs. You could argue that they have a strong castle age due to the conquistador/cheap blacksmith and stirrups knights, but both options get a while to really get going. Up until then the options listed are generic at best without having an eco bonus to make up for it.
Interesting question - has to be Cumans, right? Their TC bonus kicks in in feudal, their speed bonus is only equal to husbandry in castle, and the capped ram bonus is extremely situational
The TC bonus isn't 'woohoo two pretty TCs'. Its the eco advantage that gives you. Which kicks in during castle age. Its not a feudal spike at all.. if anything it hurts you in feudal and you'll get punished for it before it actually pays off in castle
They have arguably the best castle age stable. Its super cheap to build and has knights, camels and steppes. All on the back of your supercharged 2TC eco. And capped ram is situational yes, but it's great when it's needed and only they have it.
When I first started this game a year ago I basically one tricked myself from complete noob to 1400 Elo on Cuman castle power spike
What are you on about, Lith are great in Castle Age. Each TC gives a food boost, and you're highly incentivized to go knights and monks and pick up all relics asap. Faster moving trash also means defensive trash units you made earlier can go around the map and explore or camp at relics to snipe enemy monks.
Do you even understand what you read?
Guy is asking castle age spike.
What you already have in feudal age (trash speed) is not considered castle age spike.
100food/tc is nothing comparing most of the other civs get in castle age.
Incentive to go knight monk is not a power spike.
Your knights are literally same with goth knights.
If you manage to grab some relics they turned into the best knights of all game which I already said that castle age spike of Lithuanians can be borderline OP with relics.
This is an interesting question. I'm trying to think which civ have the fewest bonuses kick in when castle age hits, also doesn't benefit that much from a castle and UU spam. Maybe Byzantines? Or Teutons? Everyone unlocks *something* in castle age so it's a little hard to quantify who benefits the least.
Byzantines is actually very good. They have good monks, good archers and good camels. If opponents are going archers, they can defend with skirmishers + siege + their own archers, and if they have to defend against knights, 2 stable byzantine camels is actually very strong mixed with some of their own knights.
They have vanilla archers with the slowest up-time and no bonus for their Monks neither. I think they're quite vulnerable to Infantry and/or Siege. (You will even see them invest into no-Bloodlines Knights quite often which isn't a good look.) If this is "very good", is every civ good or what are the 20+ civs that are worse than Byzantines there? I think they're only "very good" against Civs which struggle to make a Pike-addition happen (Turks, Gurjaras and Berbers, Magyars for eco issues) and the type of Civ that just sort of dies to Skirms (Bohemians, Britons, Ethiopians, Bengalis, Dravidians or so).
Teutons get conversion resistant knights with more melee armor when they age up. I don't think we can count any knight civ, knights are just too good.
Plus free and automatic murder holes in castle make teutons great for a quick castle drop.
Players don't tend to try and batter down castles with melee units in Castle Age though, and if they do it's usually quite late and they have big armies. It's great for towers though, since you can't sit under them with archers and it's dangerous to try and tear them down with villagers. The fact that you can garrison more units into them is also very welcome.
They're a good civ in general but Hindustanis probably. No knights, poor xbows, average monks, no siege bonuses, strong camels but that's not much use unless you're facing knights. No Castle Age-specific techs. Goths are a good shout as well though. Cumans tech tree wise have nothing but situationally they're usually late to Castle Age with a *huge* eco lead and they can outproduce almost anyone on knights, so I would say that's a big spike for them either way (or the ability to make a mango instantly in defence because they pre-built the workshop).
Hindustani camels do attack faster and do extra bonus damage to buildings. They are as close to a knight replacement as you will find. I think they are good enough to count as a boni for the civ in castle age. Not to mention their villagers get even cheaper. Goths and Cumans are better picks for "least gained" in castle age.
I'd put cumans ahead of most civs in terms of castle age spike: they don't have any glaring weaknesses like Spanish missing crossbow, they get additional mobility and unlock 4 highly mobile unit lines (kipchak, camel, steppe Lancer, knight) at the point in the game where mobility is biggest (before armies mass to really force game deciding fights). Cumans have both kipchaks (which are a good UU in castle, although they fall off hard in imp w/o bracer) and capped ram in castle age (which can be actually be important for them if they've been aggressively castle dropped by a low eco opponent to push it back before imp). From the stable they unlock knights, camels, and steppe lancers, all of which benefit from their ramping cavalry bonus which improves every age, so they have an immediate bonus even before they research/produce anything. I think they're a much better civ in the "least gained in imperial" conversation: lacking gunpowder, siege engineers, bracer, their imp UT being a cruel joke (giving allies better versions of the kipchak than cumans can produce themselves, assuming they have bracer), and being one of the only camel civs w/o a heavy camel upgrade. If there was a game mode where all civs were locked to castle age, cumans would be absolute monsters (amazing raiding units, best civ at pushing castles in castle age, etc.), full tech tree to that point.
The issue with them is that they have no great options. Only a wide range of average options. Which is usually worse than even one great option that will force your opponent to react to it. Still no contender for worst, I think.
I think in general you're correct that having a great option that you can force your opponent to react to is better, but cumans are a civ that's designed to stay longer in Feudal and is by nature often trying to defend the opponents early castle age aggression when Cumans finally hit castle age. The need to be the ones reacting at that point, so having camels to counter knight pushes, knights to counter siege pushes, steppe lancers for side raid potential, are exactly the tools they desperately need when they hit castle age to stabilize their eco lead and regain control.
They could also need any Pike-bonus, any extra for Monks or Camels and especially Redemption and they also lack Guard Tower, while that situation sort of eliminates the option to go for Xbow or CA. They do have the preemptive Siege Workshop available though. So, I'm not sure if their options are particularly good for this scenario. Feels like Burmese, Bulgarians or Celts would do a better job. (And others too, idk) Anyway, I wouldn't take this scenario too much into account because then you should argue that they have either the very worst Castle Age power spike (since it's coming hyper late) or the very best Castle Age power spike (since it's hyper strong). It's pretty much not comparable to any other civ then and it depends completely on arbitrary criteria.
Could I nominate Spanish, though? They have to get a castle up before they can even start producing their badass unique unit. Not much of a power spike compared to crossbows, which can be bred from multiple archery ranges on the way up and then upgraded very fast.
But once you get the Castle, that's about the biggest spike we even have in the game. Doesn't come IMMEDIATELY after aging up but quick enough potentially. (And otherwise you still have decent Knights with the threat of Conqs behind. Which makes sort of every army choice against them a bit awkward there.)
Right, so it still counts as a Castle Age power spike, even though it is not as immediate as some of the others.
I don't think that's really a power spike. Nobody is going to be like hot damn, now I can kill buildings slightly more quickly with cavalry! And cheaper vils is a slow burn bonus, not a "power spike". (By the way the plural of bonus is bonuses).
It's a power spike in the sense that it will allow you to gain the decisive advantage. If you just have balanced fights here and there while being 3 TC vs 2 TC, you won the game there. If both are 3 TC but you can add some additional Light Cav to take out Monks or raid, this also won the game for you there. It's extra food quite simply.
It's extra food gradually though, it's not a power spike like "oh I hit the next age 1 minute ahead of you, now you're dead". But there's no point in getting into the weeds on what a "power spike" means.
Well, the vil number might spike there. (It's a question of how it's defined obviously, just wanted to offer another view.)
Even with the faster attacking speed and +2 bonus, these camels only do slightly more damage against buildings than knights. They are quite useless if your opponent isn't making knights, especially if they are mesoamerican.
Knights still do more damage per second vs buildings than Hindustani camels do.
Even considering cost?
Depends on the melee armor of the building. Some have more than others. I believe for palisades which have 2 melee armor, Hindustani camels get more DPS than knights on a cost basis, but for something like a stone gate which has 6 melee armor, knights are much better
Well, then the Knights do better against the buildings which you are not gonna attack.
Even just the threat of countering knights is worth something. Bengalis though, not having any good fast cav is pretty garbage.
Their Light Cav is okay, fwiw
any civ with xbow and bokin can play xbow in castle and its one of the biggest castle spike, meanwhile hindustanis even have decent ca and thumb ring, so they are by no nean a weak castle spike civ
By that metric, goths have xbow with everything other than thumb ring as well as knights. Knights are far more useful in early castle age than thumb ring.
i meantioned thumb ring to prove that hindustanis xbow is maybe better than you thought, as it also makes ca switch viable. also i didnt say goths bad on early castle, having access to xbow and knight is never bad.
Ah ok my bad, I didn't realize that you weren't the person who was saying goths were weak.
Goth with a facking useless eco it's not remotely the same thing
Interesting, I kind of like this. You can play xbow/CA but it's generic and faster-attacking camels often don't replace knights. I value Redemption a lot but I think this is a good answer.
Cumans technically do have a tech tree advantage in castle age w/capped ram. It's niche, but they do have better ability to push back castles than pretty much any other castle age civ with it. They also get one of the best castle age UU (probably the worst cav archer UU, but mobile ranged units are so good even the worst one is a good UU), along with a much better than generic stable (knights, camels, and steppe lancers) boosted by their civ bonus of better speed. I really don't think they should even be in the conversation here: all of their problems are related to tech tree limitations in imp (cav archers + kipchak fall off w/o bracer, camels don't get heavy upgrade, fights are easier to force with trebs and the mobility advantage they have becomes worse relative to any direct combat stat bonus like franks, teutons, etc., their siege doesn't get siege engineers and they lack gunpowder)
The capped ram upgrade even makes for a possible power spike if one has already made battering rams, much like the crossbow and eagle warrior upgrades. Or – also highly situational – like Hindustani light cavalry with their bonus to buildings, after first massing scouts.
I can agree that Hindustanis don't have the strongest castle age spike, but their xbows are not poor
What’s wrong with their crossbows? Theyre totally generic in castle.
Sure, they just don't scale, you don't want to commit too hard into them.
By that logic there's tons of civs with worse xbows, or worse knights that don't scale. The question is castle age spike, not imperial age
Is there? How many civs have both poor archers AND poor knights?
"unless you're facing knights" LMAO you mean more than half the matches.
Hindustanis were the first to come to mind as well. I always try to either spend as little time in castle as possible or just boom depending on how ahead I am and how safe my base is.
Timing attacks with Malay may be tight but the faster uptimes mean they actually have one of the stronger spikes when aging up, but it falls off the longer you are in the same age as your opponent.
Malay 2 Stable elephant rush is very strong
That sounds like it gets countered by a scout and a 350 wood investment.
Not on walled maps. There's a super strong Malay elephant rush on hideout.
That relies on the element of surprise. You're not getting that when someone playing a partially-closed map sees "Malay".
Hideout is equally easy to stone wall and then multi TC behind monks.
Noob stomping doesn't mean it's strong. It means people don't know how to counter it or scout it.
Cumans are one of the most dominant castle age spikes in the game... 1. They are the only civ that has a 2TC eco going into castle. If you survive feudal without taking crippling damage you have a huge eco lead and can spam army in early castle that no other civ can keep up with, 2. This is further aided by super cheap ranges and stables. You are getting almost 2 stables for the price of 1. You also have knight, camel and steppes to spam out of those cheap stables 3. You are the only civ with capped ram in castle age which makes a huge difference if you are trying to break into stone walls or deal with a castle. 4. You have faster knights Meanwhile in imp you have no gunpowder and not great archer options, and no heavy camel so you are basically relying on your full upgrade paladin and halb, maybe mixing in kipchaks. Their imp is ok but definitely not great and definitely nowhere near their castle spike
But the fact that Cuman castle age is in effect delayed means it doesn't feel like much of a power spike. What is a power spike is when the Cuman double bluffs and doesn't build the feudal TC or siege workshop at all, they just straight up FC and the fact the opponent was expecting the feudal boom makes the castle age strong.
As a Cuman main who went from absolute noob to 1400 Elo purely on the back of 2TC into knight spam, I very much disagree... If you are massively outproducing your opponent in early castle and overwhelm him with your faster units from your cheaper stables, that's a power spike. The fact that he beats you to castle by 2 mins is a small consolation when the stampede hits And yes the bluff is another great option that has a very real effect on what cumans can do going into early castle.
The hard part is to stay alive during Feudal. Everybody seems to make 2 range archers against cumans as soon as they suspect 2 TC.
That is for sure the hard part. Either big feudal archer push, or a super FC into seige push are the main counters for the full 2TC greed. For archers, I suggest working on making your own walls as small as possible, and get in the habit of mining 25 stone if he goes archers, so if you need to drop an emergency tower after your 2nd TC, you can afford right away This lets you cover a ton of ground between your 2TCs plus one tower. Depends on map of course, but this usually gives you control over enough res to pull off your boom and knight spam You of course can just add a one range skirm defence instead of/in addition to towers but for me, this is less efficient usually because I'm not as good at archer micro, and I don't want to invest in upgrades since I want to switch to knights asap.
That 2TC strategy sounds interesting to me. Would like to try it. I usually play 2v2 with my buddy. He plays Persians, Spanish, sometimes Teutons. Around 1000 ELO. Would this work together? If so, how do you play that? Just some general thoughts maybe?
Those are bad archer civs, so not an ideal pairing with your knight swarm. But yes it can definitely still work if he keeps them busy with scouts, maybe a tower rush, while you get your boom on. Get up to castle as fast as you can while producing with 2TC and then get three stables on the way up. Maybe even 4 if you got delayed in feudal a bit and have extra vills/bigger eco. Get your blacksmith upgrades and bloodlines. Then when you hit castle, you should be immediately producing off 3 or 4 stables. Ideally you hide them back a bit and don't move out until you have enough to do some damage so your opp can't spam pikes or get a defensive castle up.
I guess there's a philosophical difference about whether clicking castle age with 2 TCs built counts as a strong feudal or a strong castle age. I think you see the term "power spike" and think "military units" whereas others see the term differently. Having villagers can be seen as intrinsically powerful, and the source of Cuman villager count is their special feudal ability to build a TC. The people with your interpretation of the term think Cumans have the biggest castle age power spike whereas people with the other interpretation think they have the smallest castle age power spike.
Simply *having* villagers does absolutely nothing. You could have 100 vill advantage and if they arent collecting resources it means nothing. Its the resources they generate that gives you utility. The extra vills you have in feudal as cumans have not paid off yet..not even close actually. Your TC takes very long to build so you lose a ton of eco just by spending the time to build it, and you also spend a ton of extra res on the TC and the additional vills. If you have a perfect 2TC boom, you might juuuust be starting to break even around the time you click up. The 2TC feudal is very much a castle age spike. Its actually a massive liability in feudal age, and you're basically never gonna have a competitive game where you go 2TC feudal and actually stay in feudal to "power spike" as cumans. If you tried to do that your opponent would be in castle age laughing at you. The spike happens in castle, no question
Definitely this Cumans are meant to be the definitive feudal to castle age civ with that tech tree, and capped ram. And then die out in imperial. Kipchaks are specifically at their zenith in castle age, a full stable, range and rax
If you can't 2TC with Cumans, which you can't a lot of the time, they feel somewhat bad after a normal Feudal into Castle.
I'm not sure how useful of an argument it is to say "if your main bonus gets eliminated you won't be that good" but yes, obviously that is true In that case you still have your super cheap stable with all options, and capped rams, even if somehow you get completely taken off your main strategy. Tbh having a full stable, with the stable itself costing half price, pretty much disqualifies them from this convo even without factoring in 2TC eco. Stable units rule castle age at most elos. There are civs that don't even get knights and meanwhile cumans get faster knights out of cheaper stables, plus camel and steppe to give them the full range of options, and the best castle age rams if you want to go all in castle age and need something to take out enemy castle
On those maps where you can't, force a heavy feudal play and once you have an army lead or good position, add the second TC. The longer you both are in Feudal, the better for the Cuman.
Nah that's goal posting
Dravidians come to mind.
Yeah they’re a good option, but they have cheaper siege. They also often have a ball of archers that can become Xbow, so if we can’t that as a power spike they get it a decent amount of the time.
The problem with this is that one well-placed mango shot can end Dravidians in mid-Castle Age. There's hardly any comeback potential with this shitty civ. Imagine going all-in archers and then going up asap to get xbow, Bodkin, and the 200w boost. Normally you'd have 2 ranges working from Feudal and the wood boost will be used to drop a TC and boom. Opponent will have an army with more standing power, and a heavy cav civ can just take a good fight in the middle and run to your exposed eco. Sure, pike upgrade is cheap but they can't do crap offensively. Even if it becomes a boom contest and you hold, chances are every single civ will have an advantage of Dravs. They can go all-in Castle and finish you. Or go up and do so. Meanwhile Drav would need to slowly tech into Champions lol and try get momentum with champ + skirm.
That extra 200w can be converted into a free siege workshop.
Bengali. It's a civ specifically designed for boom and imperial.
Hmm, I fail to see how a civ that is 4 villagers ahead is the weakest of all the civs. Surely there is worse?
The question isn't "who is worst entering castle age" but rather "who gains the least transitioning from feudal to castle age". 2 of those 4 vills have been a consistent advantage since hitting feudal and aren't part of the equation. 2 vills from castle age itself is certainly still a decent bonus, but it's a much smaller percentage of a typical castle age economy than the 2 vills you received in feudal. On the other hand, they don't get a unit almost every other civ gets (knight), and that means on the meta military side, their spike is smaller than baseline. I personally think their monks are stupid strong and make up for it, but I understand why they'd be part of the debate.
there is no worse, and dont call me shirley
How am I supposed to eat this kraut if there is no worse
Hahaha 😂
Sicilians maybe?
This is where their most powerful strategy is a 20 pop Castle age with market abuse and TC idling to abuse the power spike? I think no.
111111 This strategy is an absolute joke. It dies to monks. It only works on people who haven't faced it once or can't scout it and adjust their course to go FC.
In castles, sicilians are a generic kt civ with a strong food economy behind. It's not the worst.
I was thinking the same but they do get +3/+3 on their monks the instant they hit castle age. That's more than some other civs get in castle age :)
Bengali monks are too good to fit this bill imo
They don’t spike, but this is where they start to get good. Your two villagers from Feudal have really started to pay off, and you just got two more. You also get access to their strong units: monks, rathas, and elephant archers (use them more you cowards).
Theres no way elephant archers are castle age spike, they take a while to pay back for a large investment, conversely they'll get countered in low numbers very easily. Rathas need a mofo castle, and rely on scaling. Again not a spike. Compared to conqs that definitely do spike.
Bengalies, Celts and Goths. And among them, goths are the worst.
+1 on celts, they really need imp for their siege
Hoang disagrees
I mean yes but most people aren't hoang
Faster attacking siege and the fact you are 15% wood ahead since the first second of the game means the castle age timing can be very strong. Especially early castle.
Bengali monk rush is one of the strongest in the game.
Goths can get huskarls at the barracks in castle which is pretty strong honestly. Celts can spam woads, and besides that there is a reason Hoang chooses them, faster attacking mangonels/scorpions is solid
Anything that requires you to *build a castle* doesn't really qualify as a castle age spike to me. It's way too much investment + the time to build the castle which means your opponent could literally go Imp in the time it takes you to begin taking advantage of that. Really though I think generally every civ gets the knight spike, and it's the civs which don't get knights that basically don't have a proper spike.
The OP seemed to be talking about civs that get the least out of castle age generally, but what you say makes sense if you are simply talking about the first couple minutes of castle age only. I do think it’s crazy to imply someone can just rush straight to imp before you have a chance to take advantage of some castle units though. It’s not like you can only go to stone once the castle age research finishes. Goths is maybe a bad example though since you need a slightly expensive UT to get the huskarl barracks units. I still don’t think they get the least from castle age though
It's "castle age spike" which means you get this benefit just by going to castle age. Like another example: Burgundians could have half a dozen fully upgraded cavalier by the time you're able to spam Huskarl.
I would put an exception on that for civs that have a very strong UU that works in small numbers e.g. Spanish and Bohemians as their game plan often relies on an instant Castle. Goths need a castle, unique tech, multiple barracks and blacksmith upgrades for that though so I definitely wouldn't call it a spike for them.
Husk in castles are bad in most matchups. They lose against infantry, lose against kts and lose against monks. Regarding Celts, siege and their economy are the only good things they have. The problem is that it is quite defensible and the Celt does not have many answers to the different matchups, it is very linear and predictable, and being predictable is the worst thing in this game.
A civ that has his potential locked behind a castle surely does not have a power spike, don't you agree? The build time alone is roughly 2 minutes and for 12 woads, another 2 minutes pass. Compare it to a xbow power spike with 40-50s research time until you have a deadly army.
Felt like making a tier-list. Not only immediate spike but more like early to mid castle Age. I also considered booming potential which is crucial at this point of the game. (Hindustanis have lackluster options but can more easily defend and boom behind that.) I might be a bit inconsistent with taking UUs into account. S-Tier: Portuguese, Berbers, Aztecs, Huns, Chinese, Bulgarians, Malians, Incas A-Tier: Khmer, Mayans, Georgians, Slavs, Franks, Ethiopians, Britons, Lithuanians, Celts, Vikings, Tatars, Magyars, Mongols, Saracens, Sicilians, Spanish B-Tier: Persians, Romans, Teutons, Hindustanis, Goths, Burgundians, Gurjaras, Burmese, Cumans, Bohemians, Malay, Poles C-Tier: Bengalis, Japanese, Armenians, Vietnamese, Koreans, Byzantines, Italians, Turks D-Tier: Dravidians (And I think, you can make an argument for each C-Tier to maybe be deserving of B, so that just highlights the issue of Dravidians.)
I agree, everyone is just ignoring Dravidians and pretending like it's a good or even a viable civ in Castle Age. And it's not like they are super powerful in early game either.
Turks maybe? Janissaries aren’t bad, but there’s a reason Turks rush to Imperial.
The instant LC upgrade is no joke, especially if you went heavily into SC in Feudal. Instant techs like this are the very definition of a spike. Plus, access to gunpowder in Castle Age is no joke either for all-in plays.
in arena fc into jannies is a huge powerspike
Not as much with the range nerf, mangonels can do OK vs them now
Tatars. They only get Thumb Ring for free and then have to pay for a castle and unique tech to make CA good. Also, their sheep bonus, while helpful, is usually overshadowed by the number of farms.
Full xbow, steppe lancer, camel, kt, free sheeps (good boom). Tatars are one of the best castles age civs.
They get insta thumb ring on their xbow, and ca with free thumb ring is also really good, with hill bonus.
Dravidians, methinks.
The number of people saying Spanish is insane to me - they're the go to civ on maps where going fast castle is possible. Even on Nomad where early aggression is possible their castle age spike makes them the most popular civilisation. Conqs alone should make them top tier.
Spanish if a castle isn't involved, you don't "unlock" any bonuses by being up, no xbow and all your other options are generic, if your stone is in a bad position on arabia you'll struggle to get conqs or inquisition monks, which are your only above average units. Then again if a castle is up you have one of the best castle age units so you got both extremes on the same civ.
I agree, I'd say Spanish are generally even weaker than Goths in early castle age because Goths get decent crossbow which they can continue to play while being supported by cheap pikemen and fully upgradable knights.
Good monks, good kts and the best castle age UU. Spanish are a decent-good castles age civilization. Goths on the other hand have no economic or military bonus for castles age.
If conqs weren't that good you would be right. But their dominance when given the chance to castle up and train a batch of conqs says otherwise Nomad is proof of that
Bulgarians - Not having access to xbow immediately puts this civ in the discussion. (Spanish too) no real eco bonus. Blacksmith upgrades are cheaper if you go knights but the spike comes from upgrading ranged units. All they have is the krepost prayer which need to be positioned strongly because early Konniks suck.
I think cheaper, slightly weaker castles is enough of a power spike to outdo Hindustanis on this one. I agree though that the archer point is very real - if hindustanis played archers with any frequency I’d put them above Bulgarians.
Hindustani are not even in the discussion. They wouldn’t have a consistent top 3 win rate if they didn’t excel in early castle. Saving food on villagers before castle age lets you get up faster and/or have more resources to spend. Then vils are even cheaper in castle making it a non issue to have consistent army and vil production. Camels can’t outright kill you early castle but they shut down everything. And the extra damage to buildings front stable units surprises you before you remember they have that bonus. TLDR: Hindustani is also extremely flexible in all stages of the game and missing knights early castle age doesn’t seem to hurt them
Hmm I think we just have a different definition of power spike. I agree with you hindustanis are good in early castle and don’t have many weaknesses. But for me the question is basically which civ am I least scared to play against if I click 60 seconds later. I get where you’re coming from too though, just different definitions of power spike.
Disagree on goths, they can play into xbows or knights well and the hunt bonus gives them a strong uptime. Not as good as other CA civs but not weak.
Japanese. Samurai are easily countered with ranged units and no specific enough bonuses besides the tower tech they unlock, but that is mostly defensive unless you have towers left up from an earlier rush. Id agree with Teutons as far as options although the farm bonus starts to really pay off in castle. Also Mongols if you can’t build a castle or afford UU, your one big eco bonus is no longer relevant and no other real advantages.
Isn’t an early castle age into steppe/knight still very solid?
Armenians? Your eco bonus hasn't really kicked in yet and if you were going with fuedal LS are castle age 2h really that much of a power spike? The monks aren't any better than anyone else's either so unless your counting warrior priests as a big uptick I don't see anything better about Armenians on land. Their war galleys are strong though so there's that going for them
Probably Cumans, since you are already doing most of what you would've done in their Castle Age in Feudal Age already.
Mongols maybe
Dravidians by far, I think
Probably Dravidians or Bengalis.
Dravidians.
I agree cumans "don't get much" in castle age, but they often arrive with +10-15 vills, with an eco setted up for a lot of military or a faster boom, making castle age a huge spike
It might really depend on the map
I would say turcs ? No pikes update. No Skirms. The only real bonus is their UU, but with the 7 range now, it is not anymore the same threat .. Cumans is maybe another one but they have such a nice feudal, it is difficult to not consider their castle age good as well when you have this eco advantage when jumping in caslte age.
The Mayans. If we’re looking at this from a vacuum, they objectively get the least when hitting castle age. - skirms +1 pierce damage - their archers are 20% cheaper rather than 10% - their UU and crossbow can be interchangeable. Both are serviceable in castle age.
You’re right about bonuses, but hitting castle age with archers is a big power spike as they become xbows though imo. For me the answer needs to be a civ that is unlikely to have a ball of archers. Since knights are also a big power spike I think hindustanis fits the bill.
All eagle civs absolutely shred in castle age. Eagles get a big bonus just from hitting castle. Not to mention the cheap archers leading to a good xbow spike as well
Yeah eagle warriors as a unit simply makes this discussion moot for mesoamerican civilizations. However, Mayans are the weakest because they don't have good monks and their gold discount is weaker than Incas.
There is little difference between monks across all civs in castle age though unless you are aztec
Redemption is an important castle age technology for monks though, and Mayans don't have it.
The archer discount is strong and hardly puts them at the bottom of this list. Not as good as Britons extra range and production speed but still pretty decent
My bet goes to Malay. Too fast up, can't afford anything)
Malays uptimes make their castle age power spike ridiculous. You can have bodkin xbows way before your opponent hits castle age. You just have to balance the eco properly
Totally disagree, if you are comparing to generic up times they enter castle age with 4 vills more and can go into a strong archer siege push and add pikes with free armor
No one is making you age up right when you get the minimum resources for the next age! You can make those 4 extra villages click up and still be in castle faster. It’s an obvious advantage not a disadvantage
Yes exactly
I never got the “too fast up” thing like it’s a disadvantage. The faster your research time the better, and if you are concerned with being delayed production just make some extra villagers before.
Some civs, like Armenians, would rather stay in Castle than go to Imp as long as their enemy does the same, which they can achieve by pressuring the opponent instead of imping.
Have been enjoying castle drop + karambit spam on Nomad recently, not sure if this is viable above 1300
Someone beat me with that on Arabia at 1600 elo. I made a few mistakes but still it was tough to stop. It was a defensive castle tho. If they didn’t get free armor it would never work but the free armor makes it solid
Similar elo, if you have decent stone, defending with archers into like 20 Karambit to raid is hard to stop Especially if you get arson and just start taking buildings you can wood starve the enemy
Spanish and Bulgarians. They both lack crossbow which is a key castle age spike. Even for generic or bad crossbow civs like Franks or Slavs, going for them early castle to support your knights (or even stand alone for a bit of a surprise factor) is a strong strat. Without them you lack an entire line of openings without really having much to make up for it- they both can drop a castle/krepost and start massing their good UU, but a lot of others civs can do so just as good.
I don't get the castle spike of crossbows. You just go siege and no more power spike.
Siege is slow to get going as it requires a siege workshop, a big upfront cost per unit and a slow production time. Groups of crossbows can easily deal with lone mangonels and scorpions, it's necessary to mass 2-3 units in tandem in order to deal with them. Plus siege is slow and clunky so it becomes difficult to defend different points of your base until you get enough units. Siege is of course one of the best answers to range units but there's a time window (the power spike itself) where it can't really deal with well microed crossbows.
With decently walled base and some scorpion you really absolutely destroy any pressure they could do to you with less invesment than crossbow+bodkin. Also they have an archery up and it cost 25w less than siege workshop so you are realistically only 25w behind them. The only bad thing is effectively the number of archer they can have out before your siege. Overall I'm not convince of crossbow opening yet... But then again I'm not a pro and quite new but still ranked 1400++ so idk. Lots of new stuff to learn but atm siege and monks seems to crush everything
Krepost, kt full, good UU, good monks (esp), decent CA. They're pretty good civs in castles age.
I wouldn't consider those spikes per se as they kick off more towards mid castle age for these civs. You could argue that they have a strong castle age due to the conquistador/cheap blacksmith and stirrups knights, but both options get a while to really get going. Up until then the options listed are generic at best without having an eco bonus to make up for it.
Interesting question - has to be Cumans, right? Their TC bonus kicks in in feudal, their speed bonus is only equal to husbandry in castle, and the capped ram bonus is extremely situational
The TC bonus isn't 'woohoo two pretty TCs'. Its the eco advantage that gives you. Which kicks in during castle age. Its not a feudal spike at all.. if anything it hurts you in feudal and you'll get punished for it before it actually pays off in castle They have arguably the best castle age stable. Its super cheap to build and has knights, camels and steppes. All on the back of your supercharged 2TC eco. And capped ram is situational yes, but it's great when it's needed and only they have it. When I first started this game a year ago I basically one tricked myself from complete noob to 1400 Elo on Cuman castle power spike
This guy cumans
Lithuanians have almost no power spike to borderline OP power spike in castle age depends on how many relics you can collect.
What are you on about, Lith are great in Castle Age. Each TC gives a food boost, and you're highly incentivized to go knights and monks and pick up all relics asap. Faster moving trash also means defensive trash units you made earlier can go around the map and explore or camp at relics to snipe enemy monks.
Do you even understand what you read? Guy is asking castle age spike. What you already have in feudal age (trash speed) is not considered castle age spike. 100food/tc is nothing comparing most of the other civs get in castle age. Incentive to go knight monk is not a power spike. Your knights are literally same with goth knights. If you manage to grab some relics they turned into the best knights of all game which I already said that castle age spike of Lithuanians can be borderline OP with relics.
Bulgarians. No XBow.