Hidden Cup 4 Stats

You can look here how the civs are performing in the main event
As expected the Vikings still a top ban 11.


Thanks for the link. May I ask why Burgundians have never been picked? I thought they were considered strong.

Pre nerf they were carried by a broken unique unit. They are painfully below avg


I see, thanks. Do you think they can be fixed? Their Castle Age Cavalier promised to be really interesting at the beginning.

Castle age cavalier is pretty good when there aren’t Lithuanians or Bulgarians in the field (Both can get much stronger Knights than the Cavalier in Castle age).

1 Like

Strange that both of the new DLC civs are on the UP side so fast (less than 2 months after release).

It’s early into the tournament and already all but 2 Civs could be seen in the drafts. AoE2 Civs have never been as balanced as they are right now :partying_face:

1 Like

Because they want to make up for DE release Cuman and Bulgarian 11 And even if the new civs were better than they are now, they are so recent people wouldn’t try to pick civs they don’t have completely figured out yet because this tournament has such high stakes it’s no time to mess around. Even more so in the main event since they can potentially be facing Viper or Hera at any time.

1 Like

Vikings are understandable. But why are Goths and Cumans being picked?

Cumans are a solid hideout pick. In best-of 7 I don’t wonder someone picking cumans for this if he has other plans with the other good hideout civs.
Goth have also some utility, especially in mind-gaming, because some civs are just oblitterated by goths.

I think if it comes to bo7 series we will see both civs also occasionally in the main event.

The stats shown are from the qualifier, this was like 200 games or so. And still there are two civs npt played once.

Burgundians simply not a 1v1 civ for open map since the very beginning, you can only be in behind after eco upgrades

True, I didn’t consider that.
However, considering that the one civ is Burgundians (which is new and known to be not balanced right yet) and Burmese (which is a really great Civ on Arena and in Teamgames), I still think the balance is pretty good.

If there was a map that favoured Burmese I think people wouldn’t hesitate to pick them to have an advantage, but it’s not really the case rn. Plus maybe the players aren’t too sure of what they can do with the new arambai so they don’t want to gamble.

Are they banned because they are terrible or because they are really good? They are my least favourite civ so I consider them to be pretty terrible.

You ban OP civ or civs you don’t like to play against. Bad civs are not chosen.

1 Like

Vikings are easily one of the best civs in thd game.

I’d say they have the worst late game of any civ.

not every game is boom to imp and attack like you like to do. the multiplayer scene is completely different then ai games, with aggression happening even during the dark age the vikings have one of the best economies in the game, solid archers, and of course berserks. yeah, they lack halb, bloodlines and hussar, but they also have extra hp infantry and chieftains, meaning their champs are insanely effective in trash wars.

Their one eco bonus may be great but I just love cavalry and seeing as the Vikings have the worst cavalry tech tree of all civs I’m not a big fan of them.

Well the Viking late game is so lacking you don’t need to wait until post imp for their tech tree to become a problem.

Ig their cav has some upsides compared to Malay and Korean

1 Like