I am not sure why you are surprised, the nerfs were pretty harsh.
I mean, I don’t know exactly what conclusion can be taken for that tournament specifically… I will just share my general thoughts:
Swedes: I honestly think that the fact that Fraser River being the first map really made Swedes being pick more often, since it’s just a dream map for Swedes.
I understand that some people complain about the Svea Lifeguard card and the Mamelukes shipment, but I honestly think the problem with Swedes on 1v1 supremacy is the fact that they reach Industrial Age way too fast.
If I had any sort of power I would change their Exiled Prince politician on age 3 for a Scout politician with 4 Hakkapelits, so they don’t reach age 4 as easily as they have been reaching.
Also the Mamelukes shipments should either:
a-) be worth 1000 resources, like the others age 4 infinite shipments.
b-) or just be able to be sent once, and in this case can be a 6 Mamelukes for 800 coin. (Worth the 1600 resources)
France: Do you have the statistics from the Amateur division?
I would make the point that on the pro division, there are a lot of rusty old school players that still plays France, and they lose much more because they are rusty than because the civ itself is weak.
But this is not true on the Amateur Division. If the winning percentage from France is low there as well, then this is indeed already a more reliable sample.
Spain: Age 2 Logistician needs a nerf.
It’s interesting because the way the that the top players play the Spanish Logistician is on the water (And I think Don Artie beating Kaiserklein with it is a very important factor on this), but this build is very different from the age 2 Logistician play that I know. The only person that played (That I remember) a similar build order was Haitch in a single game of the finals. (Against British on High Plains).
I have been complaining (And sometimes I was straight up bitching and whining about it, and I am sorry for that) about this Logistician from like 2 weeks after he was buffed, but I always had in my mind this particular age 2 push with ATP (Sometimes even without ATP), I did not forseen that the water version of this build would become more prevalent, even thought I knew that water play were possible because of the infinite 300 wood card.
It’s surprises me how almost no one is playing the age 2 push, as I sincerely think that this age push build order is straight up busted.
No civilization should be able to have such a good ecosystem while producing units from 2/3 buildings at the same time. And is even worst on ATP maps, because you can never contest the line well enough because of the dogs.
Japan: There is no need to fix what is not broken. Everyone that actually plays on multiplayer know that the civilization is fine. There is a considerable number of complaints about Japan on this forum, but I am still yet to see someone that actually know what they are talking about when critizing Japan.
I’m not saying that you need to be pro to discuss the game, but when you have some experience on this game and read the complaints on Japan, you just know that they where wrote by people that have no empirical evidence to back up their claims.
Portuguese: Portuguese was probably the civilization that I played the most recently, althought I rarely play on the water like the top players do. I do some age 2 play (That seems to work fine since I guess a lot of people don’t expect that Portugal do a lot of Musketeers on age 2) or House of Bragança build if the maps and match up permits. And to be 100% honest, I just don’t know how to do a proper water boom.
On the tournament, however, Portugal was basically only played on water maps (Also, this applies to Haudenasaunees too, that also have a pretty good winning rate). The only person that I remember playing Portugal on non water maps was Breeze in two game that he lost both. (Could be more that I’m not remembering, I will look into those games again sometime)
For what I see, I think water in general seems to be unbalanced at the high level, but honestly the games works very different there compared to the games that I play.
Here’s a great analysis I’ve seen (in Chinese, but you can recognize the flags, numbers and map names)
In short, this video raised some very important points to consider before drawing any conclusion from the data, considering the rules of the tournament:
- Inter-civ matchups. There are some civs that are usually picked as a counter to other civ.
- Map-dependency. For example, Hauds have a very high overall win rate, but they are used almost exclusively on water maps.
- Some civs have very similar advantages (on certain maps), but one does it better than the other, so the latter is overshadowed.
- Some civs are picked just for one strategy (e.g. typical “old-styled” land SFF), and if that strategy is countered hard, they would perform poorly.
- Swedes lame.
Exactly, their eco is still one of the best, top 3 for sure, maybe #1 (because of CDB dumb 5.40 speed instead of normal 4.00) with unjustified 120 military pop (chinese needs 120 for banner armies, train time and units not so strong, and dutch because of low eco), with one of the best skirms in the game, one of the best artillery in the game, other good and flexible options and gendarmes wich are still OP, i think they nerf it very well, im quite happy with their current stats i say they should not change those stats but their thoroughbreds card is the problem: strong hand cavalry + 20% more pop (40 instead of 33) + high tier eco + this unit costing only 27.5% more than 2 pop cav instead of 50% = is just dumb xd their stats are fine, even well balanced right now, it´s not OP unit, but their cost being highly reduced is just insanely OP, that means you can fight counters and not really starve as you should, you can fight other hand cav and let them starve… just my opinion.
These stats show how powerful civilizations are on the best map. Because the map is taken selectively. For example port sea and Otto sea+ tp maps are taken but other maps are garbage.