Chinese is not too OP in this edition

In fact, there are not many buffs that can affect the civ strength. Moreover, Chinese civ is not a strong civ in the Asian Dynasty edition. Actually it is in lower middle. Finally, don’t a civ OP or not should pay attention to its winning rate? The number of buffs is not important. Many civs exist in Asian Dynasty have gained a lot of buffs now, but they are not OP at all.

1 Like

I have no opinion about wether China is OP or not, but this data isnt usefull as the Chinese civ was picked way more then the other civs. You cant compare China to Aztecs and say Aztecs better then China when Aztecs was played only once.

It also depends on who the civ picks. If the lower rated players pick China more and they play someone who is better then them its only logical that China has more losses. Example: 1389 rates player picks china and fights against a 1500 rated player.

Also it doesnt mention the amount of games were both players picked China, this automatically means that China gets a loss.

This table also doesnt show who of the players picked China, saying its rated 1389-2200 is useless if we dont know if the 2200 rated player picked China.

1 Like

Only when you have data were the civs were picked almost eqaully as much.

According to your logic Aztecs would be OP as they have 100% winrate. Disregarding that it was player only once.

I think it is called “blind pick”.

This is funny, it sounds like the players were afraid of playing a miror matchup (China vs China).

I believe this is not specific to chinese citizens.

If we except those how spam a single strategy every games and those who abuse the OP civ & build orders of the patch, then I think most players try out many builds and strategies with their favorite civs, especially using units and cards that are not commonly used.

I think trying these things out at least once in a while is very nice.

of course i know lol. actually Aztec in this edition is becoming great again. due to the strengthen of war cheif.

i see, but have you realized that this situation will happened in all tournaments and all civs? Unfair match will happen to all civs, which makes it is fair to all civs.

what’s more, for a weaker player, when he has to face a strong opponent, maybe it is better to choose a lamer nation like Sweden or Ottoman to gamble rather than a Chinese.

there is a column shows the winrate excluding mirror

pick rate of two group will be shown after the end of tournament. because it will be meanless for most of the civs if we show them in two groups now.

of course i know it… im not stupid :face_with_head_bandage:

oh thanks. we also say “blind pick” in Chinese, so i’m not sure if i can use it in English lol

maybe that’s because most of them experienced OP Chinese :rofl:

The fact that they are the most picked says a lot, I don’t think these graphics are accurate.

Shouldn’t we evaluate a civ OP or not by using winrate? How could pick rate replace the win rate as the most important indicator?

For me, pick/ban rates are the most important indicators to evaluate the strength of a civ in a tournament, at least without having any information about the tournament.

If I only use the pick rate, I think I will mainly be off by:

  • how much a civ has been overrated/underrated by the players, because they pick the civ they believe will give them the most chances of winning.
  • how well prepared the players are. Only if they are well prepared they will not stick on what they know how to play, and instead will learn how to play what is strong. But I expect players in a tournament to come in well prepared.
  • whether the player are really trying to win or not, but I am expecting players in a tournament try harding instead of doing fan service.
  • civs that are onyl used as a counter pick

If I only use win rate, I think I will mainly be off by:

  • civs that are used only once or twice for cheesing (playing an underdog civ and winning because the opponent doesnt expect the civ or the strategy, but if the opponent knows it is coming, the opponent will probably win)
  • civs that are only good on one specific map (only picked on this map)
  • civs that are mostly played in mirror matches (eg. because they are the best civ on the map and the tournament allow mirror matches) will have a win rate closer to 50% compared to their “true” value
  • civs that are onyl used as a counter pick

I would expect the “limitations” of the “win rate ranking” to be more likely to happen than the “limitations” of the “pick rate ranking”.

And on this dream cup tournament, I would expect:

Chinese > Japanese > Swedes > Indians > British > Portuguese > … > Aztecs

to be closer to reality than:

Aztecs > Russians > Italians > Hausa > Spanish > Germans > … > Lakota.

But in the end, it is always better to use both the win rate and the pick rate to get a better understanding, as it is easy to see Aztecs as a cheese rather than an OP civ, or Chinese as a big confort pick rather than an OP civ. It is very nice that you also provided the winrate excluding mirror matches as additional information.

Ideally it would be even better to have more information such as the civ win rates by opponent civ, or the civ pick rate by map, etc… But obviously all these would take much more time to gather.

I don’t see why a civ cannot have both a very high pick rate and a subpar win rate. It seems that most players main China and many of them did not “prepare like real pro players” to make sure that they can play the best civ on each map, so they default on what everybody knows how to play (and play against).

2 Likes

Such a long article, lol.

That’s right. In my opinion, the pick rate may reflect too many situations, from whether the civ is truly OP to whether it is overestimated, so it is not the best feedback project.

I just curious many people are putting Haud in A tier in 1v1 (I think they are bottom Tier in team game and I only play team game), they are supposed to be strong in 1v1 but only 3 picks and 2 lost makes me surprised.

People will tend to use strong civs in tournament to win but I can’t see any reason in this civ? Just curious wanna know what they are strong in 1v1.

unless in sea map, Haud can’t be A tier at all. it is really hard to find someone use Haud in a tournament in my opinion.

Sorry to break it to you. China is OP.

1 Like

ok, time to show your opinion