Game Option with or without relics

Relics are important elements in a game and sometimes having 2 or 3 of them gives the team victory. In team the relics are important but in some games 1 vs 1, no. I think that in some games 1vs1 annoy and unbalance the game, giving the victory to the one who reaches them first. Then I propose the game option with or without relics. (I would like to see Arabia without relics). I don’t think it’s a big change since I’ve seen 1v1 games where professional players don’t even use relics.

Viper once beat MBL with 3 less relics.
Malay X Mayans in Arena.

Position of resources probably plays a much bigger role in a game than relic placement.

The only map in the ranked pool that I can think of where the relic spawn matters is 1v1 Black Forest: it’ll be two relics near each player, but of course the trees might mess with that. However, any other resource stuck in trees probably plays a bigger role in the game than that.

Relics aren’t that game breaking in other maps. Recently 1v1 Team Islands was changed so that it’s essentially one relic hard coded per island. And all the other maps you can scout (or fail to scout) relics and change your play accordingly.

Of course this discussion should really only matter to mirror matchups in 1v1. In 1v1 if the game really gets that late that relics matter then the civ matchup probably matters more if anything. On the other hand, in team games you probably would never rush relics, even in ranked team Arena.

Hmm @FootedElk911551 is right, relics aren’t that important in team games since they are worth much less than trade (ask people who they prefer between Aztecs and Spanish as a teammate). As of 1v1, relics sure help but the trickle is quite slow and is far from meaning victory. Exemple: You will see that Lierrey beats Viper (ie.the best player in the world) even tho said best player had relics and he didn’t.

1 Like