Is Sweden an offensive civ?

[iamgaming]

Dev said that Sweden was an offensive civ. However, Sweden seems like a defensive civ. Sweden can win a game with defending from enemy push and building torps as many as possible. If we play offensively with Sweden, it means that we can’t even use half of real power of Sweden. Why should we play offensively with a torp, the best economic building in the game? In DE, most maps have plentiful mines so we don’t even need to play offensively to have enough mine to build torps.

Currently, Sweden is a rich civ and seems like a defensive civ. I can’t understand why Dev made Sweden like this.

[Jaeger]

Perhaps they were thinking a lot of players will rush with caroleans + 2 cannons first shipment. I wonder how that strat does.

[Guigs]

Devs don't understand shit about the game lol just watch sweden balance or inca lame potential

[iamgaming]

Perhaps they were thinking a lot of players will rush with caroleans + 2 cannons first shipment. I wonder how that strat does.

Then Sweden should start with 6 vills and 6 crates, and age with 400w politician. But instead of those things, Dev gives a torps to Sweden. Very awkward.

[uberjz]

It's a very offensive civ. Caroleans trigger me

[forgrin]

When the devs talk about "offensive" and "defensive" civs in the context of civs suited for AoE2 players vs AoE3 players, they mean civs for games lasting 20 mins (Sweden) vs games lasting for 40+ mins (Inca).

[drsingh]

I think that torp was initially designed as a limited time eco boost. Which runs out and becomes normal house later. If that was actually the case, Sweden would have to engage early utilising that early spike of resources to get an advantage.

I feel that can be made like that by disabling deleting of torps. And maybe allowing only 2 torps to gather from one mine. So they would need more map control.

[[Armag] diarouga]

When I clicked on this thread, I thought that it had something to do with natives and politically correct. I'm disappointed.

[Le Hussard sur le toit]

Remember they used to think Otto were a boomy civ...

[Mr_Bramboy]

I am convinced the vast majority of the developers have never played the game.

[[Armag] diarouga]

I am convinced the vast majority of the developers have never played the game.

Ye for sure.

[PancakePrincess]

The obsession that some people have with being negative is both appaling and fascinating at the same time!

[Hazza54321]

Its probably offensive beyond 7mins when they start going 3 rax caroleans

[chris1089]

Probably about as offensive as Otto is a turtle civ.

[Victor_swe]

I like to be offensive

[fei123456]

Twice the eco, double the offense.

[kevthegooner]

It's a very offensive civ. Caroleans trigger me

I'm very offended by Carolean/Leather cannon masses. What to counter them with? Freaking culverins??

[harcha]

@kevthegooner musk falc. skirm hus would also work in smaller numbers

[TNT333]

Remember they used to think Otto were a boomy civ...

Haha, they even released a list in which they named Otto as hardest civ to use

[duckzilla]

Well, if you intend to boom with Ottomans (as the developers did), then they may actually be the hardest civ to use. Because they suck horribly at booming.

[samwise12]

Sweden offends the core values of an RTS game

[88_Baron_Rojo_88]

Sweden , Inca super rush , and general civ balance of the civs , offends the human intelligence , worst than RE .
They have done the most difficult, leave us an even worse game

[samwise12]

Inca don't have a super rush, but they are probably a little strong overall. The overall balance of the other civs is pretty good though.

[sebnan12]

Inca don't have a super rush, but they are probably a little strong overall. The overall balance of the other civs is pretty good though.

Ye cuz without sweden and incas its ep

[fei123456]

Remember they used to think Otto were a boomy civ...

Otto booms the opponent's TC. A boom civ indeed.