Dravidians are terrible

[SMUM15236]

@benithisrael

And light cav

They ignore armor after researching Wootz Steel.

[Nerathion]

@Pulikesi25

In competitive tournaments there’s usually civ bans and 1 water map or maybe a couple of more hybrid maps with more water play and Dravidians are usable there.

Sure, but I’m fairly certain (off the top of my head, might be wrong) Dravidians were also picked on land maps/tournaments.

@Pulikesi25

Either meta open maps like Arabia or middle control maps or closed maps. Dravidians should either be a top-20 on all or a top-10 on one of these.

Oh hey, they’re top 20 on Arena! IDK if AoEPulse also can show teamgame settings, but I’d also suggest that they’re likely better in teamgame settings where your ally can cover your weaknesses with their own Knights.

But I don’t think the ‘top 20’ is necessarily a good way of looking at it. Dravidians sit at around 45-46% winrate… which is pretty good (unless I’m majorly messing up how I look at the stats there).

@Pulikesi25

Archer line is generic, Elephant archers are terrible worthless units

IDK, the wood bonus is enough to give them a strong Archer opening, Skirmishers shooting faster also makes their Archer play better when you’re against other Archers, and I simply disagree with Elephant Archers being terrible worthless units.

@Pulikesi25

one of the worst bonuses for infantry with no improved stats on produced units like Japanese, Burmese, Teutons, Romans or Celts have

Wootz Steel is one of the worst bonuses? I’d say it’s definitely at the top with other bonuses, and definitely better than Celts.

@Pulikesi25

None of the civ’s bonuses address the severe handicap.

And my thought is that the way to change the civ is not by removing its handicaps, but making the existing bonuses better. This is what keeps Dravidians unique as a civ right now, and giving them some bland bonus (or just going ‘oh hey you have Knights now’ is terribly uninspired.

@Pulikesi25

remove the stupid siege discount that doesn’t fit and give them a strong economic bonus to make them much far ahead than others like Malay

What strong economic bonus would you suggest, and would it be on top of the +200 wood bonus or replacing that as well?

@Pulikesi25

a very strong tower/castle related bonus to make infantry + towers or infantry + castle drops usable

‘Villagers drop off +15% more Stone’ let’s go 11

@Pulikesi25

super strong ranged units (like archer line benefits from barrack units, extra projectile, extra default speed etc)

Faster firing Elephant Archers? I get we disagree on the unit being good or bad, but… Elephant Archers are super strong ranged units. The only thing they die hard to that you can struggle to counter, are Siege Onagers. You have your Champions and Halberdiers (and your own cheap Siege) to counter enemy Skirmishers and Cavalry.

@Pulikesi25

very good monks or some unique building to make raids on them less effective or a heavy rework of unique unit gameplay like Indians–>Hindustanis.

I’ve suggested giving them Redemption which makes their monks good enough, but giving them a monk bonus treads of Bengalis’ territory too much. Personally, I don’t find Urumis to be that problematic right now, I point to TheViper’s game above where Urumis shredded through Byzantines. 11

@benithisrael

their winrate has been quite abysmal.

Their winrate is around 46% or above?

@benithisrael

Atleast somewhat like old malians bonus, “Fish and Berries last 30% longer”. It can give the same benefit of carry capacity without forced drops.

I’d still keep the carry capacity, but also… I don’t think the Berry bonus would be that important on land, to fix seemingly the lack of a strong eco bonus. Berries are gathered the slowest, so I can’t imagine this boosting them all that much. But hey - I wouldn’t mind.

@benithisrael

The first bonus gives them the resources needed for a smooth start.

Just +25 of each resource feels… a little ‘whatever’, really. I’d rather have +200 wood (which also gives them a really smooth start in Feudal age) than this. I get that you’ll have the flexibility of adding a tower in Feudal and still having enough for a TC afterwards, but it still feels inconsequential.

@benithisrael

The second bonus

These bonuses are sort of hard to hypothesize about, so it’s hard to argue as well. I’m not necessarily opposed to them getting another eco bonus, but this seems a little excessive… weren’t you the person who hated three bonuses in one? This one is… four bonuses in one. 11

(Faster lumberjacks, better farmers, amazing Fishing Ships, very fast Villagers with a much higher carry capacity. Was going to add better gold/stone miners, but they lack the second upgrade. So with the first upgrade and this, would their miners work 22.5% faster in total?)

@benithisrael

But Urumi get killed by E skirms in castle age.

Well, that game showed that they shred through Skirmishers and Hand Cannons. I don’t know what your games were about, but I think the problem might’ve just been that you trickled them in one by one vs jumping them with a mass? You can see in that game that Skirmishers can also pick off Urumis one by one, but because Urumis move so fast, having a small group engage in combat means they’ll massacre the Skirmishers.

BTW, since Romans opened the Pandora’s box of aura units, what if… Medical Corps made Elephant units have a small aura effect that healed nearby units for a low % per minute? Like 5% of the unit’s total HP (doesn’t stack, doesn’t affect Siege units). It’d be less than Maghrebi camels tech for Berbers for Elephant units, and it wouldn’t be amazing on other units either, but it could potentially make Elephant units far more viable for them, even Battle Elephants would have a use to heal your Infantry army.

[Pulikesi25]

@Nerathion

Dravidians were also picked on land maps/tournaments.

Terrible stats on all land maps. Fish n fish, Morass are probably the only land maps where Dravidians are usable because of the nature of those maps but otherwise Dravidians are terrible. I think 20% or something winrate in MOA and 25% in KOTD

@Nerathion

Oh hey, they’re top 20 on Arena!

Definitely not. Lack of husbandry would make the light cav relic picking meta play difficult. No possibility of castle age uu play, no possibility of monk rush, no major eco/military boost like Poles, Cumans for unconventional mid-castle age or early imperial age builds. No siege engineers, no redemption monks is quite a big disadvantage as well. Strong skirms are good but halbs need a ridiculously expensive upgrade for +3 attack.

@Nerathion

Dravidians sit at around 45-46% winrate

45% winrate is not good. Time and again people keep seeing “oh this is just 5% less than mid value, very reasonable” but no. 45:55 odds means your opponent is 20% relatively more likely to win the game than you. And that’s huge.
In terms of comparison, there’s only about 10 civs with worse winrates than Dravidians.

@Nerathion

IDK, the wood bonus is enough to give them a strong Archer opening, Skirmishers shooting faster also makes their Archer play better when you’re against other Archers

All of these are fair enough but nothing to follow up in castle age. No camels, no knights, no bloodlines or husbandry, no monk related bonuses, no castle drop related bonuses, one of the worst unique units so no uu play possible either.

@Nerathion

and I simply disagree with Elephant Archers being terrible worthless units.

. Even before that DLC, no one ever made that unit in 1v1 competitive games. If they are worth it, definitely by now they’d have become more mainstream. Very expensive, very slow, mediocre dps. Especially considering how it belongs to civs that lack knights and CA.

@Nerathion

Wootz Steel is one of the worst bonuses? I’d say it’s definitely at the top with other bonuses, and definitely better than Celts.

Celts, Japanese, Vikings, Burmese, Malay are FREE bonuses. You hit feudal age and your units have extra speed or hp or rof or attack. Whereas Wootz steel is locked behind Imperial age castle technology. The tech costs a ridiculous amount of resources. And by the time you get the upgrade, the units will be fighting most probably are hussar, skirms, halbs from other civs, knight line occasionally some other special infantry. Except Wootz steel champions vs knight-line units, the net damage is always the same as Burmese infantry which comes at 0 cost.
Its obviously better than some meme 1v1 UTs like hussite reform, mahayana. But its not an infantry bonus that the civ can use from the early stages unlike other infantry civs.

@Nerathion

What strong economic bonus would you suggest, and would it be on top of the +200 wood bonus or replacing that as well?

Depending on the bonus it can either be in parallel to the 200 wood or replace it.
One of these bonuses - Villagers drop off 5% more food, villagers except farmers drop-off 15% more food, start with 2 patches of shore fish under the tc and 2 less sheep, lumberjacks generate a trickle of food at 10:1 ratio, one of the line of eco upgrades give 50% more benefits can be in parallel.
Bonuses like Villagers drop off 10% more food, start with 3 patches of shore fish under the tc, lumberjack generate a trickle of food at 6:1 ratio, stone miners produce a trickle of wood at 3:1 ratio, all eco upgrades give 50% benefits (proposed by @benithisrael) can replace it.

@Nerathion

‘Villagers drop off +15% more Stone’ let’s go 11

Not a bad idea at all. Ideally I’d want food from stone to keep infantry production while continuing to drop towers. But if this bonus is paired with some default bonus on Dravidian towers that’s solid as well. Like towers get +2 attack in feudal, +4 in castle and +6 in imp, arrowslits removed.
Another way to approach is infantry units reducing tower cost or increasing tower attack in some balanced way. (like +1 attack for every 7 infantry subject to a maximum of +3, or -3 stone for every 2 infantry units subject to maximum of -30 and something proportional for castles in castle age )

@Nerathion

Faster firing Elephant Archers?

Archer line units are good in early game because they don’t cost food, easy to produce and you can attack immediately upon hitting castle age with a decent number of units. CA are great from late castle age onwards because they are fast, hit from different spots and can run back to regroup when counter units arrive. None of this is possible with elephant archers. They are not usable.

@Nerathion

Elephant Archers are super strong ranged units. The only thing they die hard to that you can struggle to counter, are Siege Onagers. You have your Champions and Halberdiers (and your own cheap Siege) to counter enemy Skirmishers and Cavalry.

All of these are the black forest team game use of Elephant archers. Siege onagers and other expensive units. Not easy to afford in 1v1. If you’re able to do Siege onagers or several canons + Elite elephant archers in 1v1, you’ve either won and just having fun against an opponent who’s refusing to give up or its a game where you’re opponent is also trying something like that. Ballistas or Elite hussite wagons maybe, so basically a meme 1v1 game.

@Nerathion

Personally, I don’t find Urumis to be that problematic right now, I point to TheViper’s game above where Urumis shredded through Byzantines. 11

Don’t know which game you’re refering to but if urumi swordsmen worked, pretty sure he wasn’t up against someone his level. Not Tatoh, Hera, Liereyy or Mr.Yo.

@Nerathion

I’d still keep the carry capacity, but also… I don’t think the Berry bonus would be that important on land, to fix seemingly the lack of a strong eco bonus. Berries are gathered the slowest, so I can’t imagine this boosting them all that much. But hey - I wouldn’t mind.

Yes absolutely. Berries lasting longer is a mediocre bonus.

@Nerathion

These bonuses are sort of hard to hypothesize about, so it’s hard to argue as well. I’m not necessarily opposed to them getting another eco bonus, but this seems a little excessive… weren’t you the person who hated three bonuses in one? This one is… four bonuses in one. 11

Depends on the bonus and the civ’s tech tree. Free wheelbarrow or faster age up are more powerful than double bonuses from many civs. Multiple bonuses for a civ with a very good tech tree until ~50 mins is excessive. But its quite fair for Dravidians. Meso don’t have cavalry and get very powerful bonuses to compensate for it even though they have eagles. Same holds true for Vikings, Malay that get very weak knights. Now Dravidians neither get knights nor eagles. Eco benefits should be much more than these civs but its much smaller.

@Nerathion

(Faster lumberjacks, better farmers, amazing Fishing Ships, very fast Villagers with a much higher carry capacity. Was going to add better gold/stone miners, but they lack the second upgrade. So with the first upgrade and this, would their miners work 22.5% faster in total?)

You have to pay for all those upgrades. Usually only double-bit axe and horse collar are done in feudal age. Sometimes even horse collar is skipped for faster uptimes. This is more of a mid-castle age boost. Skips the necessity for handcart for farmers, lumberjacks will be on par with celts and gold miners on par with Malians. With bonus like this, they can get insanely good up-times like Malay and units like elephant archers could become a usable option.

@Nerathion

You can see in that game that Skirmishers can also pick off Urumis one by one, but because Urumis move so fast, having a small group engage in combat means they’ll massacre the Skirmishers.

OMG…really? did a castle unit that costs 65 food and 20 gold with an insanely expensive UT, massacre skirmishers? That’s so…ordinary.

Most of the non-ranged melee unique units will be good against skirms and will kill fragile units like hand canoneers if those aren’t controlled. Problem with using urumis is they die very easy when opponent target fires with skirms or uses gold ranged units with a meatshield. Hard to mass because of high food cost till late imp and not much value compared to champion or Dravidian light cav for late game. 4 p.armor and 65 hp for a fully upgraded castle unit is too little.

[Nerathion]

Sort of agreeing to disagree with most of the Dravidian complaints - it’s pretty evident that most of these arguments are just cyclic and we’ve been over these already. 11

@Pulikesi25

If you’re able to do Siege onagers or several canons + Elite elephant archers in 1v1, you’ve either won and just having fun against an opponent who’s refusing to give up or its a game where you’re opponent is also trying something like that.

Do team games not count, though? I’ve been talking about both 1v1s and teamgames. If you’re getting stalled by Skirmishers, you don’t even need Siege Onagers, just standard Onagers are fine and you see those regularly in 1v1s.

@Pulikesi25

Don’t know which game you’re refering to but if urumi swordsmen worked, pretty sure he wasn’t up against someone his level. Not Tatoh, Hera, Liereyy or Mr.Yo.

It’s vs El_Matador… who is still a top 50 player. This arbitrary exclusion and dismissal is weird to me. Shall we start just looking at any ‘proof that Dravidians suck’ game with the same lens? I don’t think that’s right nor what we should do.

TheViper lost a game as Aztecs vs Sora kuma as Koreans. Koreans OP on Arabia confirmed? I hope you can see how absurd that sounds?

@Pulikesi25

did a castle unit that costs 65 food and 20 gold with an insanely expensive UT, massacre skirmishers? That’s so…ordinary.

You’re in luck, because they also massacred Hand Cannoneers similarly, the infantry counter. And they weren’t sitting AFK, but Matador actively microd them.

Even Cataphracts weren’t taking great fights, but that one I’ll not mention as Matador lacked some upgrades (but also, with Wootz Steel it’s not like you even need armor upgrades right).

TheViper was against Elite Skirmishers, Hand Cannoneers, and Cataphracts (Knights earlier). He won the game with Infantry play, against a top 50 player. This isn’t him beating up some low elo nobody, but another player who’s actively competing in tournaments as well.

I would also argue that restricting data sets to just top players fighting eachother (TheViper, Yo, Hera, Tatoh, Liereyy) is also useless, as any player could make a small mistake that the other capitalizes on. Each such game should be looked at thoroughly to also determine whether the game was won because of civ, or because of a myriad of other reasons.

[SMUM15236]

@Nerathion

Sure, but I’m fairly certain (off the top of my head, might be wrong) Dravidians were also picked on land maps/tournaments.

Yeah. They were surprisingly picked a lot in KOTD with unsurprisingly very low W/R.

[Pulikesi25]

@Nerathion

Do team games not count, though? I’ve been talking about both 1v1s and teamgames. If you’re getting stalled by Skirmishers, you don’t even need Siege Onagers, just standard Onagers are fine and you see those regularly in 1v1s.

Even in team games, I don’t think you can go for Elephant archers + siege onagers in Arabia. Its mostly free boom closed map games. And in those games you’ll be up against many units that are even more powerful. Ethiopian siege, houfnice, ballistas, maybe even persian elephants.

@Nerathion

It’s vs El_Matador… who is still a top 50 player.

And Viper is a top-3 player, winner of several S tier events. Its a skill mismatch. Its like a 2k playing against a 1500.

@Nerathion

This arbitrary exclusion and dismissal is weird to me. Shall we start just looking at any ‘proof that Dravidians suck’ game with the same lens? I don’t think that’s right nor what we should do.

It actually feels the other way around. Shall we look for Viper or Yo’s game against some top-50 but definitely not a top-20 player to prove that some unit and civ is good? Viper did Persian elephants against Kasva in Atacama. Does it mean Persian elephants are viable and the meta in Atacama?
He did Elite Battle elephants + onagers + elite elephant archers + siege elephants against myi.Daniel in Kawasan. So are they the meta for Kawasan?
Good unit is something that’s usable in a competitive game between equally matched player.
You can find several tournament games between two players with nearly the same seed where the unique unit player is winning because of Coustillier, Leitis, Mangudai, Keshiks, Conquistadors, Wagons, Janissaries, Ghulam, Chakram throwers, Obuchs. Not a single game with urumi swordsmen.

@Nerathion

You’re in luck, because they also massacred Hand Cannoneers similarly, the infantry counter. And they weren’t sitting AFK, but Matador actively microd them

This game? 52 urumi swordsmen vs 21 hand canoneers? 4 castles trebbed down and hanging by a thread. This is the type of “flex” move that I previously mentioned. El Matador had already lost but was just refusing to give up. Game seemed closer than it was because Viper was massing Urumi swordsmen and that gave time for El Matador.

Edit: I watched the game, couldn’t post it. The link got #ed out. Viper was much ahead by the time the fight you were talking about happened. And before that fight 2 large groups of infantry units got mopped up. Castle at El Matador’s base was down, champions raiding El Matador wood in the North, halbs raiding farmers while Viper never got raided.

@Nerathion

Even Cataphracts weren’t taking great fights, but that one I’ll not mention as Matador lacked some upgrades

Ya just Elite upgrade, logistica and 2nd attack upgrade. The right way to put it is he had only 1 relevant upgrade for the fight.

@Nerathion

I would also argue that restricting data sets to just top players fighting eachother (TheViper, Yo, Hera, Tatoh, Liereyy) is also useless, as any player could make a small mistake that the other capitalizes on. Each such game should be looked at thoroughly to also determine whether the game was won because of civ, or because of a myriad of other reasons.

Totally fine to not restrict that way. Any game between two pros is fine but it has to be a game between players of same skill level. You can take a game of El Matador playing against Jackk, El Noniro, Stark, Whitecourt, Somero or any one else close to his ATP rank of 57. That’s a fair matchup. Not El Matador vs Hera or Viper.

[LinedJoker18896]

As we near Dravidians are terrible’s 1000th post. So what are you seeing this thread for.

• Dravidians are underrated
• Dravidians are overated
• Dravidians need buff
• Dravidians need nerf
• Dravidians need rework
• Dravidians need change to their bonuses
• Dravidians need more civ techs
• Dravidians need change/buff to unique units/techs
• Dravidians need good cavalry
• Dravidians don’t need good cavalry
• Dravidians are fine
• Dravidians are op
• Dravidians are map dependent civ
• Dravidians are a team civ
• I am fighting for Dravidians to be no 1
• I am fighting for Dravidians to be underpowered

Thank you for your votes!

[Nerathion]

@Pulikesi25

Good unit is something that’s usable in a competitive game between equally matched player.
You can find several tournament games between two players with nearly the same seed where the unique unit player is winning because of Coustillier, Leitis, Mangudai, Keshiks, Conquistadors, Wagons, Janissaries, Ghulam, Chakram throwers, Obuchs. Not a single game with urumi swordsmen.

Well damn, I’m sure we’d have those games as well but you’re restricting the data set to very few games. The other civs have been out for years, and even then Castle UUs just in general aren’t always the game-winning move because the game is decided before UUs come into play.

@Pulikesi25

This game? 52 urumi swordsmen vs 21 hand canoneers? 4 castles trebbed down and hanging by a thread. This is the type of “flex” move that I previously mentioned.

21 hand cannoneers and like 40 Elite Skirmishers (and Cataphracts), idk - from what this thread would tell you the Urumis should’ve all died.

@Pulikesi25

I watched the game, couldn’t post it. The link got #ed out.

Yes, I had the same problem, so I posted a link with spaces. Annoying.

@Pulikesi25

Viper was much ahead by the time the fight you were talking about happened.

Damn, but I thought Dravidians should fall over to Knight + Monks, what gives?

@Pulikesi25

Not El Matador vs Hera or Viper.

The other Urumi game I remember is around when DOI was launched and Viper made Urumis that demolished Jordan’s army of Cavalier and I think Chu-ko-nus. Is Jordan not good enough either, then?

[LinedJoker18896]

Votes got deleted since i edited it. Can you re-vote! Thanks!

[Pulikesi25]

@Nerathion

Well damn, I’m sure we’d have those games as well but you’re restricting the data set to very few games.

That’s fine. If you pick examples like that, you could potentially conclude there’s no imbalance in the game. No OP civs or units, no weak units at all. Lets say I pick a game where some guy did OG steppe lancers and lost to Viper. And saying its ok because a pro player made them and lost. There will be huge imbalance problems. There’ll still be legacy Huns, obsidian arrow mayans, +5 carry capacity Aztecs, OG lancers, Khmer with bombard canons etc. There’s never been a civ with 100% winrate or lose rate. So there’ll always be anomalous examples. You have to discard games with a large skill gap.

@Nerathion

21 hand cannoneers and like 40 Elite Skirmishers (and Cataphracts), idk - from what this thread would tell you the Urumis should’ve all died.

The thread talks about equal skill matchups where Viper will NOT be in a position to spam 50 elite urumi with wootz steel and raid the Byzantine player with them.

@Nerathion

Damn, but I thought Dravidians should fall over to Knight + Monks, what gives?

Damn once again neglected the skill difference. Everyone would agree that Dravidians can win against any civ when the opponent is significally weaker. There were once some hackers who had negative cost for every tech researched and hit 1st spot in the leaderboard in 2 days after a bugged patch. One of those guys still lost to Riut and it was hilarious. You can take Dravidians, remove halb upgrade, remove wootz steel and match them to a very weak player with OG Cumans and the Dravidian player will still win. And such a game has NOTHING to do with civ strength and game balance.

@Nerathion

The other Urumi game I remember is around when DOI was launched and Viper made Urumis that demolished Jordan’s army of Cavalier and I think Chu-ko-nus. Is Jordan not good enough either, then?

That was the first game I thought urumi are actually good. And even now I think they’re a decent unit against chukonus, when Dravidians manage to mass them. And if you give them a solid economy, they might actually be able to do that consistently in a fair matchup.

[Nerathion]

@Pulikesi25

You have to discard games with a large skill gap.

But it’s not a large skill gap. Viper is better than Matador sure, but both already know how to play the game at the expert level.

It’s not the same as a 2k player fighting a 1k player, it’s a tournament winner playing someone who’d come in 16th out of 32 high level players.

The problem with your argumentation is that you’re saying a game where Viper wins Nicov does not count because Nicov is not top ## ## MbL. Even Liereyy is not in top 5 atm, if Champions Invitational is to be believed. You’re drawing an arbitrary line in the sand where you decide who is good enough and who isn’t.

This is just absurd man, someone who’s top 50 in the world is definitely someone who can win Viper relatively frequently.

[filtercoffee488]

@Nerathion

But it’s not a large skill gap. Viper is better than Matador sure, but both already know how to play the game at the expert level.

Sure, but I wouldn’t compare top 5 players with anybody else. Viper, Hera, Lierry, Yo and Tatoh are so strong that I’d say they would have over 60% or even higher win rate against everybody else. If champions invitational is to be believed, Viper and Hera are in their own league.

Now, all that being said, I think that the urumi game is not impossible for everybody else. The problem is just getting through castle age with the two main handicaps they have and get a full boom. If that happens, and the positions are relatively equal, anybody can do what Viper did. Not as well as him, obviously. But people can absolutely win games by trying to mimick what he did with urumis.

Urumis are extremely strong once you get there. If they had like +2 pierce armour, they would be totally broken. I think they should drop urumi’s cost by 5/10 food. That would help massing them just a little bit.

[LinedJoker18896]

Urumi should be buffed a little bit. Urumi should have 1 base pierce, -5 food and +5 hp to both normal and elite version.

[Pulikesi25]

@Nerathion

But it’s not a large skill gap.

It is. Matador is yet to qualify to an S tier event. Viper has won a dozen of them.

@Nerathion

Viper is better than Matador sure, but both already know how to play the game at the expert level.

Any 2k+ player knows how to play the game at an expert level but it doesn’t mean the skill gap between any such players is low. If that were true, every tournament we’d see a different set of players qualifying to the main event, different people in quarters, semis and finals. S tier Tournament 1 finals Viper vs Hera, S tier Tournament 2 Mbl vs Nicov, Tournament 3 Kingstone vs Capoch and so on. But that’s not what happens. Any four of Viper, Hera, Yo, Liereyy, Tatoh are mostly the semifinalists. Villese, Vinchester, ACCM, Nicov, Mbl, Daut, Sitaux, Capoch, Jordan, Barles these are the guys almost always in the main event.
And even beyond this you can find tiers of players. It’s always difficult for one tier of players to win against another who’s one tier above and nearly impossible to win against someone more than 1 tier above. Viper is like 4 tiers above El Matador. In any random game, Matador’s winning chances against Viper are nearly negligible. Even he might not disagree with this.

@Nerathion

It’s not the same as a 2k player fighting a 1k player, it’s a tournament winner playing someone who’d come in 16th out of 32 high level players.

I’ve explicitly mentioned its similar to a 2k player vs 1.5k. Its the winner of several tournaments playing against someone who has never made it to top-32.

@Nerathion

The problem with your argumentation is that you’re saying a game where Viper wins Nicov does not count because Nicov is not top ## ## MbL. Even Liereyy is not in top 5 atm, if Champions Invitational is to be believed. You’re drawing an arbitrary line in the sand where you decide who is good enough and who isn’t

Never said that and I’d never say Viper vs Nicov doesn’t count. And I’m definitely not the one deciding it. Their ATP ratings and tournament elo says that. Its more or less like comparing civs. If you said at pro level Arabia Chinese or Malians are better than Incas, some might agree, some might disagree, opinions will be mixed. But if you said they are better than Koreans, no one would disagree. Probably you alone might be saying both civs are equal because both have bonuses.

@Nerathion

This is just absurd man, someone who’s top 50 in the world is definitely someone who can win Viper relatively frequently.

One win for every 10 games is not called relatively frequently. They barely meet each other in ladder, Matador is much below.

@filtercoffee488

Urumis are extremely strong once you get there. If they had like +2 pierce armour, they would be totally broken. I think they should drop urumi’s cost by 5/10 food.

They could be solid in some matchups but cost should be reduced a probably a bit more. A more balanced approach would be to help them get there with stronger economy or military bonuses.

[Nerathion]

@filtercoffee488

Sure, but I wouldn’t compare top 5 players with anybody else. Viper, Hera, Lierry, Yo and Tatoh are so strong that I’d say they would have over 60% or even higher win rate against everybody else. If champions invitational is to be believed, Viper and Hera are in their own league.

I would say this would’ve been true a few years ago (and several years ago it was just Viper and then everybody else), but the skill gap has definitely narrowed down. I don’t think a top 5 vs top 50 player is that big of a difference for that particular game to be dismissed. There are larger skill gaps in your standard ranked play.

I would agree if this was some other 2k player out of the top 100.

@filtercoffee488

I think they should drop urumi’s cost by 5/10 food.

I guess if they had to get a buff, I’d agree with this. It’s relatively inoffensive.

@Pulikesi25

But that’s not what happens. Any four of Viper, Hera, Yo, Liereyy, Tatoh are mostly the semifinalists. Villese, Vinchester, ACCM, Nicov, Mbl, Daut, Sitaux, Capoch, Jordan, Barles these are the guys almost always in the main event.

Not to create too long of a tangent, but I’d also give you a thought experiment. Do you think if Viper had to work full-time while trying to stay competitive would still continue qualifying for S-tier tournaments (often with their own special settings)?

We’re seeing a ton of new names come up, so what used to be the dominant three has become now a dominant eight, and the few names chasing the top players are now twenty new names.

Personally, this way of arguing is just illogical. Tournament performance is vastly different from casual ranked performance. The top players have the advantage of being able to play full-time, train with their own team and fly to whichever LAN events because that’s their job. It’s incredibly hard to break out into the tournament scene otherwise.

I don’t think this is nearly enough to dismiss that a top 50 player therefore is that bad compared to a top 5 player, especially when you’re only looking at tournament performance.

[Pulikesi25]

@Nerathion

Not to create too long of a tangent, but I’d also give you a thought experiment. Do you think if Viper had to work full-time while trying to stay competitive would still continue qualifying for S-tier tournaments (often with their own special settings)?

We’re seeing a ton of new names come up, so what used to be the dominant three has become now a dominant eight, and the few names chasing the top players are now twenty new names.

I’m not saying El Matador can never become an S tier event player or he can never win Viper ever. I’m just talking about the situation as it exists today. Maybe in less than a year Matador grinds and becomes a top-20 player. Everyone in top-20 starts winning fairly often against others. Maybe Daniel wins Hera, Andy wins Liereyy, Sitaux wins Viper. And I’d really enjoy if there’s more uncertainty right from the group stages.

@Nerathion

I don’t think this is nearly enough to dismiss that a top 50 player therefore is that bad compared to a top 5 player, especially when you’re only looking at tournament performance.

Viper is 9-1 against Matador in ladder as well. There’s obviously lower gap between ranked ladder viper and Matador as compared to tournament viper and matador but it still is huge. Maybe you don’t follow competitive scene except for a few random youtube videos but that’s how it has been for quite sometime. Unless these players experiment something new or do some viewer challenges, they almost never lose against someone who’s not a S-tier regular.

@Nerathion

Personally, this way of arguing is just illogical. Tournament performance is vastly different from casual ranked performance. The top players have the advantage of being able to play full-time, train with their own team and fly to whichever LAN events because that’s their job. It’s incredibly hard to break out into the tournament scene otherwise.

Again, I’m not discussing the reasons why they are at another level compared to most others or sponsors, teammates and external criteria. But the fact remains that they are at another level. And yes it is true that its hard to break out into the tournament scene for upcoming pros.
And how is “Hey look, some strong player did something against a weaker player and it worked. So what he did is viable” a logical statement?
And if you feel that skill difference based on tournament performances is illogical and that any 2400+ is practically almost the same level, what do you have to say about this:

@Pulikesi25

Viper did Persian elephants against Kasva in Atacama. Does it mean Persian elephants are viable and the meta in Atacama?
He did Elite Battle elephants + onagers + elite elephant archers + siege elephants against myi.Daniel in Kawasan. So are they the meta for Kawasan?

[Nerathion]

@Pulikesi25

But the fact remains that they are at another level. And yes it is true that its hard to break out into the tournament scene for upcoming pros.

No, the point was a ranked game is different from a tournament game when it comes to pros. They’ll have their own special strategies for each map, something you might not see in a ranked game, where the gap is lesser.

@Pulikesi25

And if you feel that skill difference based on tournament performances is illogical and that any 2400+ is practically almost the same level, what do you have to say about this:

I don’t have any context for those games. I’m also not saying that Dravidian Urumis are meta vs Byzantines. The game was merely to point out that the unit actually isn’t the worst unit ever, maybe?

As in, the unit performs well against a well-microed army of counters, and supposedly another unit that also beats them (Skirmishers), which is simply not really true.

Urumis are fast enough to close the gap, and the charge attack means only few units need to get hits through to take out a large chunk of your army. Them having no pierce armor isn’t that big of a problem, as the unit functions in its glass cannon role fairly well, to the point where it’s possible for them to chew through its supposed counters.

[benithisrael]

@SMUM15236

They ignore armor after researching Wootz Steel.

Yup! Couldn’t recall because it’s never viable.

@Pulikesi25

In terms of comparison, there’s only about 10 civs with worse winrates than Dravidians.

And once you go up ELO like 1200, Dravidians are bottom 5. And the trend is the lower elos are also catching up towards bottom 5. The only reason Dravidians are better in low elo is because of their low pick rate.

@SMUM15236

They were surprisingly picked a lot in KOTD with unsurprisingly very low W/R.

Mostly Archer civs were picked on KOTD. Dravidians with the wood bonus and fully upgraded Arbs can fake an archer civ.

@Nerathion

I don’t think this is nearly enough to dismiss that a top 50 player therefore is that bad compared to a top 5 player, especially when you’re only looking at tournament performance.

I was surprised too that Viper managed to hold for so long that too against Byzantines. But normal players can’t mimic the Viper easily. I rarely transition quickly from one unit to another. I stick with arbs and Halbs in late game as Dravidians. If I can’t kill them in early imp, any good Siege player will steam roll me.

@Nerathion

‘Villagers drop off +15% more Stone’ let’s go 11

This might be okay. But as I said before, I’m not a fan of these Drop-off bonus. Stone is a Koreans thing. First a siege discount and now a stone discount, It only exposes the poor design of the civ.

@Nerathion

weren’t you the person who hated three bonuses in one? This one is… four bonuses in one. 11

11
You got me there. But the thing is, this bonus is not a free bonus. So you take a while to stabilize your economy then upgrade towards your gameplay. So its not going be opperssive like the malians bonus. Besides, they lack last upgrades for all techs except 2-man saw. When the cost of the last mining techs were reduced, its an indirect nerf to Dravidians who don’t get any of them. Now, the civ needs to be balanced again. With this bonus, you can remove 2-man saw too giving the civ the unique identity of having none of the last eco-upgrades.

The more important reason why Dravidians need a very good eco bonus like 50% more economy effect is because for all practical purposes, they play like a meso civ without eagles. Aztecs and Mayans get amazing eco bonuses to sustain them till 45-minute mark. Dravidians should get the same. 200 wood is just not going to cut it when you play long games.

@Nerathion

+25 of each resource feels

You also need to design the civ with a specific theme. Designing a civ is an art, if we had only practical consideration, The game loses its beauty. That is the reason for the 1st bonus. This change will make the civ beginner friendly. You are not punished for following tight build orders. Granted its not a big bonus. But it’ll carry the civ till the second bonus kicks in. The 2 bonuses give the civ a pure economy flavor which was true during medieval times when South India was called the gold sink of the world. It was not due to spices alone. They had amazing metal working like wootz and clothing industries like Kancheepuram sarees. So its apt to give more effect from economy bonuses.

@Pulikesi25

Definitely not. Lack of husbandry would make the light cav relic picking meta play difficult

This is a big problem. That is the reason I’ve advocated '‘bloodines’ as a must have for Dravidians. This weakness is shared by Vikings. But they atleast have fervor and still suck on arena despite being a boom civ.

[benithisrael]

I loved the poll. It made me realize its best to put the technologies and changes discussed into a poll as well.

Do you make stables as Dravidians?

• Yes
• No
• Not recently

Do you make scout or light cav as Dravidians?

• Yes
• No
• Not recently

Do you make Battle elephants as Dravidians?

• Yes
• No
• Not recently

Is ‘Bloodlines’ necessary for Dravidians?

• Yes
• No
• Doesn’t matter

Is ‘Redemption’ necessary for Dravidians?

• Yes
• No
• Doesn’t matter

Is ‘Urumi’ re-work necessary for Dravidians?

• Yes
• No
• Doesn’t matter

What new trait does Urumi need to become a viable unit in caste age to serve as cavalry replacement?

• More HP
• More attack
• More Speed
• +1 Pierce armour
• +1 range on charge attack
• Aura effect
• Less training time like Shotels
• Train at barracks
• Need cavalry unique unit like Rajendra
• No change

Is ‘Siege discount’ necessary for Dravidians?

• Yes
• No
• Doesn’t matter

Do you want to replace ‘Siege discount’ for Dravidians?

• Yes
• No

Is medical corps a worthwhile tech for Dravidians?

• Yes
• No
• Doesn’t matter

Can medical corps be replaced?

• Yes
• No
• Doesn’t matter

What kind of technology do you want to replace medical corps?

• Infantry
• Cavalry
• Archer
• Monk
• Siege
• Elephants
• Economy
• Defensive tech
• Anything is better

Do you manage to research wootz steel in your games?

• Yes
• No

Do you want to replace Siege discount with 50% more economy technologies effect?

• Yes
• No
• Doesn’t matter

Do yo want to replace 200 wood on age-up bonus?

• Yes
• No
• Doesn’t matter

Do you want to replace +15 fish carry capacity bonus?

• Yes
• No
• Doesn’t matter

Do you want Dravidians to have more naval bonus or tech?

• Yes
• No
• Doesn’t matter

Do you manage to win 50% of your matches as Dravidians?

• Yes
• No

How to make Dravidian elephants useful?

• More HP
• More attack
• More Speed
• Less cost
• Double current LOS
• Conversion resistance
• Aura effect
• No change

[Apocalypso4826]

You made the actual poll questions themselves options in the polls, which should definitely not be so.