Although not an overly active member in the AOM community I am an active player as are several of my close friends. We play five or six games a week on our LAN at work and have played all of the Age games over the years.
The latest argument that has come up and won't die is that one of the players involved with our weekly games STRONGLY believes that the Egyptian catapults are significantly stronger then any of the seige in any of the other races which invariably unbalancese the game. He believes that their long range and higher CD makes them too powerful.
There is no impirical data, in fact, he plays the greeks and has won far more consistently then any of the egyptian players involved in our games (myself included). The egyptian seige catapults definitely have the longer range and higher CD, however are handicapped by their lower HP when comparing them directly to the greeks. Also, the egyptians only get the ranged catapults in the forth age where the greeks get them in the third (granted the greeks catapults are significantly weaker).
My counter argument is that the Egyptians have their inherent weaknesses, if your not playing RA they have slower economies, they all build their buildings slower without the aid of the Pharoah, making the egyptians more of a micromanaged civ then the others, the Egyptians also have limited hero units. The Greeks have their inherent strengths that can counter balance this Egyptian strength and capitalize on it's weaknesses. The greeks have powerful hero units, they have a more "stable" early economy due to their inherent faster gather rates, they have powerful cavalry and stronger ranged archers then the Egyptians and these stengths must be used to defeat the stonger seige.
What are your thoughts on the Egyptian seige and seige in general in the game? Is seige to strong across all the civs as some of my friends stipulate and that the Egyptians is by far the strongest which then unbalances the game?
I'd love to hear your thoughts...
LET ME KNOW!