Hey guys
as the title says… what do Eagle Civs do against the new Hindustanis? If there’s Ghulams on the map, I feel like Eagle Civs are just dead.
Aztecs and Mayans can still do fine in a lot of unfavorable matchups because of their supreme economy, but Hindustanis also have a great eco and won’t fall behind because of this.
Castle Age
Aztecs: Against Ghulams they could go Jaguar Warriors but they get countered by something like Crossbows.
Mayans: Plumed Archers have a little bonus damage against Infantry, but I feel it’s not enough to kill Ghulams.
Incas: You could go Slingers, but they’re easily countered by Scouts, Camels or Skirmishers.
Imperial Age:
All 3 Eagle Civs can do nothing against Ghulams + Hand Cannoneers.
3 Likes
The very strong Aztecs and Mayans finally have a bad match up
3 Likes
idk why ghulams have +2 bonus damage against eagle warriors. but even if this bonus damage was removed they would still have a bad matchup
3 Likes
Win before late imp, I’d also expect Ghulam + Hand Cannon to be very gold intensive. Hussar spam is also probably hard to deal with for Meso civs.
Eagle spam into eco could be nice, Hand Cannoneers don’t become a thing until Chemistry is researched, so you can kill their eco before they get to that point. Ghulams are also restricted to a castle, so try preventing those from going up. Every Meso civ has Siege Rams that can also rush down Castles early imp, so Archer play isn’t dead either. Camels and Scouts die to Archers too.
Incas can also do Kamayuk, I guess? Those should kill Ghulam + Scout/Camel/Skirmishers pretty easily, so all you need is something behind to kill Hand Cannons.
1 Like
I agree that early damage is key in those matchups. But often times that’s easier said than done 
of course, if you don’t le them get to Ghulams, then you can do fine. But that’s why I included “(Ghulams)” in the title.
But if you go for the Castles, you can’t really protect them with Archers and Hindustanis can go for them with any kind of melee units (e.g. Ghulams, Hussars, Camels).
Well yeah in theory they can, but if you say “try preventing those from going up”, the same can be said in this case. But to be fair, I haven’t seen how Ghulams do against Kamayuks, but you could be right, that Kamayuks do pretty well in that matchup. Incas could fall behind in eco though.
True, sounds reasonable to me, to remove that bonus damage.
But Ghulams need castle to train it
Eagles are still an amazing option to pressure Hindustanis and they still need to build a castle to counter eagles properly. So with all three eagle civs you can comfortably pressure them with 1TC triple barracks and win right there.
If you don’t manage to win here, you can still go for jaguar + skirm, kamayuk + skirm/slinger, or double gold with Mayans
1 Like
Just wait and drain gold after that go for anything. civ is too much gold dependent
Aztecs can do Jags + siege + skirms
Incas can do slingers and siege and maybe Kamayuks or skirms
They can also do champion I guess
Mayans… Well, Mayans will struggle, but tbh the Ghulam isnt as big of a problem for their eagles and they have always been able to deal with HCs just fine
And you should be able to outlast them in terms of gold unless you go full gold or double gold unit
Actually, I tested. For equal numbers Mayans’ eagles with Eldorado can win against ghulams…
Then so do Garland Wars Eagles I suppose?
Aztecs already had tons of bad or even-ish matchups including Bulgarians, Berbers and Byzantines.
Anyway, Ghulams probably need a nerf. That or Longswords should get bonus damage vs them.
the problem is that Eagles are not technically an Archer-line counter, while Ghulams are. So Ghulams should not trade “nearly evenly” vs Eagles given how Eagles are the more situational unit (Ghulams have bonus vs Archers AND pass-thru damage that allows them to do OK in mass battles vs Militia-line and not totally suck vs Knights, either).
Furthermore even Knights isn’t rly an option vs the very strong Hindustanis Camels at which point basically the only unit you can make is Militia-line.
Well, for equal numbers they don’t… Even the Incas eagles are better against ghulams than Aztecs
Why should Incas Eagles do better than Aztecs Eagles? Fabric Shields is only +1 melee armor while Garland Wars is +4 attack. Garland Wars has to be better than Fabric Shields against Ghulams.
2 Likes
Eagles are an archer-line counter. its descriptions and stats says it. Ghulam is without doubt better, but they are more expensive. The tests I made where in equal numbers, not equal resources. I suppose that for equal res Mayans eagles easly win, and other eagles could out number easly ghulams and win…
total res or balanced res? and at what rate? food to gold like 1:2 or bottomed out market prices like 1:6 (-ish)?
and also they almost cost the same anyway. +10 food and -5 gold for ghulam is not too big of a deal if you ask me.
5 resources more expensive is not what I call “more expensive”.
I was hoping to not have to state the obvious, but Ghulams require less resources than El Dorado Eagles to be FU.
Anyway, yes, Eagles are an archer-line counter, but they don’t have any bonus dmg vs archers, nor pass-thru damage. They counter archers only because of 3 PA and speed factor.
I will say, nerfing Ghulams but not eagles would be just dumb.
So Hindustanis can do double gold compositions easily because they can summon gold from trees, while Meso civs can’t.
No wonder they lose against Ghulams then. 
Ghulams + crossbows, Ghulams + camels/HCs, sure why not.
But then why can’t you go slinger+kamayuk, plumes+eagles and jaguars+eagles?
Meso have also good skirms, and in castle age can use pikes against camels and scouts very well.
1 Like
Berbers literally struggle hard vs Aztec all-in pushes. Byzantines are also pretty meh vs them unless you get to Cataphract which is usually to big of an investment. Bulgarians are pretty weak tbh