Ethiopians small nerf?

To me it seems that this is by far the best Archer civ in the game at the moment (if you exclude civs like Chinese which are stronger as a result of having a wider tech tree and being more boom-oriented). Aside from an archer bonus, they get so much going for them so I believe a small nerf could be in order.

To recap:

  • +100 food +100 gold obtained per age (especially useful for early Feudal and early Castle, really helps smoothen the economy)

Comment: this is one of the strongest eco bonuses in the game imo as it gives you 400 resources in the first 20 minutes of the game. Compare this to an eco bonus like the one Burmese get for example (which is a decent mid-tier eco bonus) that saves 150 resources on the 1st and 250 on the 2nd upgrade in the first 20 minutes of the game. This is better because you can choose where to spend the resources and it’s also more “valuable” resources (gold in early Feudal for example allows you to get up to 2 extra Archers without going to gold)

  • archers fire 18% faster

Comment: not much to say here, it’s a pretty good bonus that makes Ethiopian crossbows skyrocket in DPS, they are called “machine gun” by some pros now. It’s a really strong combat bonus but it’s deserved since archers is what Ethiopians should be good at and its strength is comparable to the Britons archer bonus

  • Pikeman upgrade free

Comment: this is also a fairly strong bonus, Pikeman is the common complement unit to Crossbows and in early Castle age normally there aren’t enough resources to do this upgrade. It also saves the research time, in short you can churn out 4-5 extra pikeman between the time saved on the research and the resources saved. Just to give a mental picture, imagine if a cavalry civilization like Lithuanians also got free Elite Skirmisher upgrade at the start of Castle age to counter the common counter-units to their go-to strat. Sounds insane no?

  • Shotel Warrior in Castle

Comment: this is not strictly a bonus but Shotels are an excellent unit to complement how Ethiopians play because they can rush down weak units, harass villagers, capture siege units and so on. It’s a unit on the expensive side but it has 2 very big advantages in that it produces very fast (even without the UT) and it’s fairly good without upgrades. One of the better UUs “in actual games” where you might find yourself creating these in a pinch

Last but not least, Ethiopians get a full Siege tech tree with full Siege Workshop units, Siege Engineers, as well as all building HP boost technologies except Hoardings. Notably they get the somewhat rare Siege Engineers Bombard Cannon.

Ethiopian cavalry kinda sucks, so it’s OK that they have good siege, good archers and FU Halberdiers, but I would like to see them lose some of their early game bonuses. For example, Pikeman upgrade should be something that you research for -50% price. I think this nerf would still maintain them top tier but make them also more reasonable to play against where for the first 25 minutes of the game they always get a power spike of some sort. I am open to other suggestions though, for example an alternative nerf would be +75 +75 resources per age and not +100 +100.

Last but not least, though this is largely anecdotal, remember that between Archer civs and Cavalry civs, Archer is the slightly more versatile unit for the reason that in early game it’s harder to mass food-intensive units (like Knights), and furthermore Archers can fire above walls so are a better complement to Siege than Knights who can endlessly get walled off by increasing layers of walls. Though this is anecdotal, again, I don’t want to drive this point too much because Knights have ways to get past walls also and have advantages that archers don’t (e.g. can run under TC fire or under towers that are defending resources).

1 Like

The win rates are pretty normal. Nothing that really indicates it needs a buff or nerf. I would even say that this civ seems one of the best balanced civ if you only look at winrates. Their winrate even declines if you look at higher elos. So this civ isnt really OP at all. There isnt really any thing special about this win rate. It seems completely fine.

Only at EW it is one of the better / best picks, since the +100 +100 is a feudal age bonus, so they get that bonus too.


these stats can’t be right. It’s only cavalry civs at the top, Chinese are in the middle and some solid mid-tier civs like Portuguese are at the bottom. All this tells, in my opinion, is that in low- to mid-elos, people can’t defend against cavalry factions so cavalry is a very strong unit due to poor walling. Cavalry in general has a reputation of being very strong in lower elos, while in high elos you generally see Crossbow play because those are more versatile, allow for faster Imp time and have more micro/outplay potential vs enemy Crossbows/Mangonels.

I agree that Ethiopians are top tier in EW, but imo they are good on Arabia also, as good as an Archer civ can be. They have a really strong Castle age play that is really hard to stop, if you fell behind slightly, I don’t see you coming back vs an Ethiopian player due to his faster firing Crossbows entering your base and him being ready to do a tech switch to Pikeman very fast if it need be.

1 Like

You are now looking at the overall stats of all elo. You can also look at 1650+. I hope you dont consider 1650+ still as lower elos.

One of the things you will notice is that Chinese will become much higher. At lower levels, their start is too akward. As result their winrate is much lower at lower elos. At 1650+ Chinese winrates are about 53,8%, which is top 5.

And a civ like Portuguese only really excel on water / hybrid maps. They are pretty bottom tier on other maps. They are pretty much considered as one of the weakest Arabia civ out their. So no surprise it is pretty much bottom tier.

The stat are clearly right. Only thing i dont really know is when they update the data for the last time. Seems like the latest data is from the May patch. This civ isnt really nerfed of buffed since then. And you can see a trend over the patches as well. Their winrate is from many months just around or just below 50%. That seems pretty reasonable to me.

Here you have the 1650+ elo winrate list:


Why nerf an average civ ?
Ethiopians are clearly not as good as you seems to think
They are missing eco bonus outside of 100 food and gold which is a great thing in early feudal or fast castle only
They are missing decent cavalry and champion
They have almost only archer halb rest is else missing a lot of techs or are simply too expensive for 1v1 (siege torsion engines )
Their uu are good vs eagles and huskarl and thats all


Also good taking down TCs and doing quick raids before die 11

Hussar are clearly better for raiding even ethiopians one killing tc for like 15 shotel dead is never worth it in late game

Raiding is best with constant 3-4 units in eco and shotel have no interest in that since they gold cost and have low survivality

well that’s why I said before die

It was considered to tier before the RBW4 I think. But I think it didn’t delivered as espected, at least in the group stages.
And it’s mainly because other civs don’t get the full bonus they would deserve from realistiv gameplay. Like the faster rushes from lith and mongols usually give them a vil advantage which isn’t reflected in EW.

So, there is absolutely no reasoning to nerf eth right now. Maybe we could open the big archer vs knight thing again, as it looks that pros somewhat “broke” the game with their insane micro vs mangonels or specifically more in avoiding mangonel hits.

But do we want to break the game just because pros become too good at one single thing?

1 Like

This post is wholly overrating the Ethiopian bonuses. Free res is cool for men at arm but besides that it’s often worse than a long term eco bonus. Burmese free upgrades are better because you save ressources and start gathering wood faster immediately. Ethiopian can do a FC on arena without mining gold and yet they are far from S tier material. Pikemen are cool but not as cool as just more archers when it comes to kill cavalry. Shotels are OK, but definitely not something that would make the civ OP. Also saying that they are good in “actual games” because of their production speed is kinda rich when right after you bring up Eth siege. Just add up the upgrade cost required to get just to FU Ethiopian SO to see why.
Eth cav doesn’t just suck, it’s utter trash, plain and simple.

Like, the civ is not bad, but there is no way they are “too good” or deserve a nerf.


I don’t wanna go into details, ultimately you can have your opinion though I disagree with it, but there is no way that Ethiopian cavalry is “trash”. In Castle Age, it’s as good as Britons cav, which is not a unit that you open or mass but you can make 8-10 of them without feeling at a disadvantage. You still get +2 +2, only Bloodlones is missing. Just for the record, not every civ that lacks Bloodlines is “trash” or their cav unplayable, it’s just not a long-term unit.

wanna see trash cav, check out Malay missing 2nd armor AND Bloodlines, now THOSE melt to Castle Age Crossbows.

this is also anecdotal and just an opinion. I could flip
the argument and say that resources are better because you choose which eco bonus to buy first (incidentally, most players would agree with this standpoint). But ultimately, resources or eco bonus, since stuff like 2x Bit Axe is always researched at start of Feudal, just to make an example, it matters little if you get resources or an eco bonus. With Burmese, the 20s advantage that you get from researching the tech instantly amount to probably like 5 extra Wood compared to a generic civ who has to click the button, along with the 100f 50w saved, of course.

this fails to grasp what makes for a good arena civ, every civ in this game is capable of doing a FC build, and not having to build a 100w mining camp can’t really be considered a substantial enough advantage, in case of Arena you are looking for more long term permanent advantages such as Teutons farm bonus + lategame, Malay villager lead early on or early Imp power spike with something like Turks. There are plenty of insane civs in the game that are average on Arena, for example Mongols or Aztecs/Mayans.

Ethiopians have none of those but it doesn’t mean they are bad, on Arabia they are top tier because for example Teutons Farm bonus there is not that good, I could flip the coin and say that Teutons are trash because they are trash on Arabia but that doesn’t mean it’s true, and the most common game mode is Arabia/Hybrid, on those Ethiopians are top tier.

what makes Shotel good is that as soon as you have a Castle, you don’t have to tech into it + it produces fast, clearly Hussar is better but getting to Hussar or even Light cav for that matter is a 1500+ resources investment between production buildings, Blacksmith upgrades and Stable tech.

Long-term Hussar is better but we are not looking at lont-term here, we are trying to cheese some common counters to our unit composition (eg Mangonels) without making a tech switch and here Shotel is pretty good because you might not even have a Stable to make Knights in early Castle.

Only their machinegun need a nerf, so instead of 18% give them 15%. About Shotel maybe their 16 attack need a nerf.

1 Like

If we go by this metric then it’s almost impossible to have a bad unit in castle age. Ofc it’s important to use units even if they can’t be FU but it’s not a reason to not call them out for being bad either. In this case, Briton cav will end up being much better than the Ethiopian one.

Ethiopians can’t possibly have better cavalry than the civ that can buy elephants for less ressources than a knight.

Anyway why would resistance to crossbows matter here? If you’re Ethiopians, you’d rather use your own better xbows, or skirms or mangonels to counter enemy archers.

This is not just an opinion, this is the very reason that makes Chinese, Britons and Mayans overall better than Ethiopians.

Uh no? When you play Burmese, you can invest the saved res wherever you want.

It allows you to pull of strats that would force other civs to forego the upgrade. That’s one of the reason that makes Franks so good at scout rushing, you don’t need to care about horse collar while every other civ would need to pay for it or risk being penalized for ignoring it.

Your post wasn’t targeted at any map in particular so I assumed you meant at least “land maps”

In what world Aztecs aren’t an S tier arena civ 11

I don’t think anyone ranks Ethiopians as S tier on Arabia outside maybe of EW, and no one in their right mind would tryhard with Eth over Lithuanians, Japanese, Persians, Huns, or even Byzantines on hybrid maps.

Elite shotel upgrade alone = 1200 F 550 G. And add to that the fact that while shotel raiding is good, it’s burning your gold fast so you need to make it count. It’s not a strategy that can be used every game consistently, nor is it always doable. It is thus doubtful to mention this as contributing towards making Ethiopians too good.

Worse than making your own mangonels really.

So you defended the Ethiopian cavalry and now you’re saying shotels matter because you can have a castle in early castle and before a stable? Not only that’s inconsistent but I’m struggling to conceive how you came to think Ethiopians are too good if in your experience they are played like that.

Let’s forget about how this bonus is the hardest one to use when it comes to micro, because it’s pretty easy to waste compared to more HP, more range or simply more numbers.

Bruh they would be worse than karambits then.


Even malay can make like 8 kts without any problem since teching more than +1 defense seems too expensive for like 8 kts and did you think that malay has good cavalry ? i don’t think so, the fact is you cannot make cavalry as main army of ethiopian because no bloodlines and more important no +4 defense which all your cavalry completly useless in imp so you need to transition which makes a lot of times and ressources especially if you want to makes archers.

[quote=“Green4uu, post:11, topic:137492, full:true”]

Yes it’s a good bonus for early feudal or early castle but no it definely help with getting maa + wood upgrade + villagers especially if you make more than 3 maa and for fast castle sooner while keeping the possibility of tc or monastery relics but not more than that, in imp it’s negligable, and past the middle castle age as well compare it to free wheelbarrow / hand cart / Chinese eco / franks free farm upgrades with berry’s bonus / slavs or teutons farms, / celt wood , brits tc + sheep , aztec eco , indians food saving, malians bonus, khmer farm or even malay and compare these past early feudal and you will understand that is not a strong bonus as you may think

Well you can create fast shotel yeah compared to hussar but to do what ? especially without upgrades ? Sniping mangonel will be probably impossible because mangonel is always or or a least must be always protected, so shotel with their low hp and no upgrade will simply die expect if you are making a lot of 1 mangonel which is very costy don’t mention castle cost.
with light cav on the other hand, you can began to use it once you have got light cav upgrade and +2 defense, that’s clearly not affordable in early castle, but light cav are not designed to be used in early castle age, so yeah not really costy especially compared to shotel which requires a castles and requires at least some cheap upgrades likes squires +1 defense. as for raiding as i said that’s not a good idea that’s an investissment which will in most cases not viables if only in this purpose, you don’t want make gold unit especially uu for raiding, you can use your gold unit to raid if you have military advantage but making a new gold units which is expensive to get and don’t have survivality only in this purpose is non sense.

Add Vikings, Malians, Malay, Spanish & Burmese.

Until you look at the consistent 56-60% win rate in <20 min games lol, It’s funny because the OP complains about late-game stuff, which isn’t even the problem with the civ. It’s just the archers. Everything else is basically fine about them. I don’t even pick this civ, because it feels like an absolute cheese when getting a win as Ethiopians. Whenever I roll it in random, just kill the opponent in feudal.

Most of the civs have a time frame in which they excel. There are also other civs with this kind of peaks. There is nothing wrong with having such peaks in the graphs as long as the total win rate is fine.

Most civs have moment in which they excel, but also weak spots. It would be something different if a civ has a high winrate in for example <20 and many games are also ended quickly. Then you will see a high overall win rate too. Now they tend to win the quick games, but there are also many games that goes late game and then they have a disadvantage.

Just go give another example:
The Goths are kind of the opposite civ. They have to survive the early game, since that is the weak spot. But if they manage to get to post imp, they will have a very high chance of winning. It is even 73% winrate for games >40 minutes for Goths! But there overall winrate is just 50,16%. This shows many games already end before they get their chance to shine (note: I look at the 1650+ winrates for Goths).

This shows that having a peak win rate at some point in time doesnt really matter as long as not all games end in that time frame. For Ethiopians: You goal is to kill quick or you are behind. In the end it is pretty much balance, since their total win rate is nothing special.


What you say makes sense, but I don’t see many games lasting beyond feudal age in my own experience. So high win rate in imperial doesn’t concern me so much. I can’t actually remember any game in the past 2 weeks that reached imperial… on the other hand even a slightly higher win rate in feudal concerns me a lot, because that seems to be where most of my games are centered around. YMMV.

So the person who joined this forum to defend the Inca trush is now trying to explain everyone how games end in feudal all the time, and thus 55% winrate in feudal age on aoestats means a civ is too good. As they say: 11