He said at 0:39.

I was about to post that people should take a -arrow- shot for each time SotL says "Bracer".

He said much about it in this video

Brace yourselves

@@rubz1390😂

And what was your top 3 bracer comments in this video?

Thank you for your service.

I was counting too, you are awesome

Elephant fun fact: They are 100m from your location, and approaching rapidly. Running will not help you.

This I still remember when as a kid I was playing OG Age of Kings: Barbarossa campaign and in the last mission I encountered those beasts. Impression that I got back then, maked me big fan of using elephants in strategy games.

Elephants were actually OP Vs AI back in the day, because the AI wouldn't always create monks to counter them.

Elephant fact: they are very smart and poaching them for tusk is just cruel

@@redbasher636 "Running is useless♡"

I would honestly prefer Persians not getting crossbowmen and getting Bracer, than as it is now.

@@tyranitararmaldo *que the Ontage*

11 times LOTR has mentioned it 11

I always thought it's weird for a non-christian civ to have access to paladins. Even when I knew it was referencing Persian heavy cavalry.

So true for both comments

​@@matheusbianquincera3104so true for all 3 of these comments

Its a reskin..

They should do unique skins and more unique units for every Civ. Would make them all stand out more.

Fix the typo, because this is an absolute banger pun.

Oh look, it's Salnax! I know you from the wiki. This is UnofficialGameExpert78. You can tell by my total obsession with Georgian Svan Towers.

@@SvanTowerMan Yeah, that checks out. Hello!

I do love this joke, a shame it wont go so far

Underrated comment

please don’t give devs more ideas .. they fuck up pathing even more than it is

The carts should garrison from one side and leave out of the other side of the market, and there should be a neat lil animation of the cart being unloaded/loaded.

The problem is that many players who don't know how it works would put them up against the edge... even though it has somuch potential...

What would happen if there's a building/cliff/forest/void outside the map edge touching the Market?

Yes!! That would be amazing

Mayans should have their own unique archer skin. Giving them European crossbows is a bit nonsensical even by 1999 standards.

@@124085 as if Mongols were known for their crossbow usage Or Aztecs were pratzing around with their Champs full of iron, while "poor" Eagles and Jags had to make do with volcanic glass Does anyone know why Mongols use Chinese/Korean/Japanese architecture?

@@The-jy3yq Not sure what your point is. I'm in favor of more regional, flavorful variants of generic units.;

I really, really hope it doesn't. One of the things that I think makes aoe2 distinct is that absent some specific bonus, units are easily identifiable as being the same across civilizations.

"Not Fully Upgraded but still useful" has got to be my favorite AoE2 design trope. Viking Arbs w/o thumbring. Burgundian Cav w/o bloodlines. Teuton's Knight-line w/o husbandry. It gives the generic units some character.

@@124085 Huns and Mongols latter also lacks last Cav armor

@@The-jy3yq The key here is "useful", Huns just straight up suck, lol Mongols on the other hand are powerful even without the final armor upgrade.

@@124085 ueeeeh? Twice the number of Cav Archers, how about that?

@@The-jy3yq To clarify, Huns aren't literally useless but I don't think it's a stretch to say that they've been powercrept out of the meta. Not being able to build houses is more of an eco drawback than it is an eco bonus because you cannot house-wall. Their tech tree while efficient is incredibly bare bones, to the point that you are only going to Imp for the trebs. Their UU while thematic and visually cool looking needs a buff, or at least a buff to its flame particles and attack sound like it was in HD. I don't hate Huns, but I feel they could use a mini-rework. Right now if you fall even slightly behind with them there really isn't a way to catch up because their late game is so bad.

It's also a reference to ancient Persian infantry being made of cardboard, specially in comparison to Greek hoplites and Roman legionaires.

​@@tinkywinky1238 Exactly. It's not for any game design I feel, but a nod to Persia's historic specialty of highly mobile archers and cavalry, it was also partly why they had difficulty dealing with Greece and, eventually Macedonia, as they focused so hard on archery that Alexander's shock cavalry techniques eviscerated the infantry lines and routed them. Later on, they developed a lot more like the Mongols, with a focus on cavalry archers and mobility.

Didn't they have the IMMORTALS tho So I would love AOE II designers can reskin the HALBERDIERS to IMMORTALS who do decent against champions ig (compared to HALBERDIERS) and serve as a good staple for PERSIAN players who like a bit of INFANTRY

@@Sivzram It is a difficult task because halbs are supposed to pount cavalry and get pounded by almost everything else. Trash infantry which still pounds cavalry like halbs do and does better against champions? Lets see how this could and couldn't be done: - NOT by giving them 1 range - NOT by giving them bonus damage against infantry (spear line units are supposed to get countered by infantry with no way of fighting back decently) - NOT by increasing their health and lowering their already small damage in exchange. Considering all the upgrades, Halbs need 10 hits to kill a champion and can take 5 hits from a champion - NOT by increasing their damage in exchange for damage. If they had 7 instead of 6 damage, then they would need 9 hits to kill a champion, but lowering their health below 57 would mean they can only take 4 hits from a champion (considering all the upgrades) - Increasing attack speed would be an interesting mechanic, but it WILL involve lowering their bonus damage against cavalry. I don't think it's a good idea to do this because Cataphracts exist - The argument of having a unique unit which works different falls because Persians already have 2 unique units. Not to mention it would be a trash unit It's hard to compare them to the Roman Legionary since Romans have a different model for their militia line, already reaching +4/+4 armor upgrades in Castle Age and their castle unique unit not being nearly as much of a tank like the War Elephant is.

@@Sivzram first off, Immortals were not, well, immortal, they were elite forces, yes; but their main feature was the fact that their number always stayed the same - hence the illusion of them being immortal Also they had extra rapid replenishment Also you'd probably be a few centuries late with them However, an Eastern Swordsman reskin'd be funny Upd: Gurjaras have 3 unique units + Mill

No! I like my strong independent War Elephants.

It is weird that they don't have riders. Elephants were occasionally released without riders to run amok on a battlefield or to besiege a city, but most usage of them was for mounted warfare, and especially mounted with archers. So it's also weird that the Persians don't get elephant archers either, as that was how they were primarily used. But then again, they lack bracer, so their elephant archers would likely be the worst in the game if they did get them

I was hoping they wouldn't and I am happy they didn't

This

Romans funnily enough deals exceptionally well against Goths, but then again, Romans do well against a lot of civs, it's just funny Romans is one of the Goths top 5 worst matchup according to 1v1 stats.

@@CrnaStrela no wonder, Goths are only good in Imp, Romans have the crazy +5% to Vill efficiency as well as all the tools to make a solid Scorp rush, a Tower rush or just a simple Scout opening, all of which hurt Goths massively, as they are kinda defenseless until Perfusion is available

A lot of the base game civs honestly don't need buffs! They're all relatively balanced tbh.

I was not a big fan of what they did. They mostly just made them stronger. I was hoping for more differentiation. Many of the base game civs could do with some changes to make them more unique. There is always a trade off where adding uniqueness makes balance more difficult. And aoe2 is known for being conservative about uniqueness compared to other RTS games. That has served it well generally. But as the team has gotten much better at balance through experience and data collection I think they can now start safely adding more uniqueness. I would really like to see more region themed units, buildings, and techs applied to the older civs. Similar to what they have done with some of the newer civs.

100% agree withu bro. I want more regional infantry units, and new unique units/bonuses for the older civs. @@peterisawesomeplease

@@peterisawesomeplease I agree with uniqueness being needed for some of the OG civs. And theres also debate to be had over units that make little sense like Woad Raider, but the nostalgia side of me would prefer that they are kept as they are.

why do they need Condos tho

Go watch Mike_Empires aoe He(?) does such battles mainly

They counter each other. It could go either way.

Savar wins, not as dominant though. It is still stable cavalry vs castle archer uu, they won't win.

They sux in 8 games i losed 7 they NEED ti be buffed

skill issue@@karonteazt3286

Nah you just have a skill issue.

@@HotShotZX being top 100 of the world in EW? I srsly doubt It...

​@@karonteazt3286still skill issue 😂, also 8 is a small sample , it doesn't mean anything

Yes it is, I can tell you right now.

In his third side hustle, spirit of the little known facts 1🤣

Can the Persians get the Eastern Swordsman reskin?))))

Nailbiting