Water Civ. Thematically I would have expected the opposite.
But No… Bengalis don’t make it into any of the top 5 categories while Gurjaras do.
1 Like
And it matters because?
1 Like
SotL didnt say that Gurjara’s navy was better than Bengalis navy.
He said that Gurjaras perform better than Bengalis (and Malays, Koreans, Dravidians, Portuguese, Italians,etc…) on “open swamp maps” (so no mangrove jungle) where we can land units and ships can fight each other.
In open maps, cavalry civs are always strong. And archers are weaker since they get countered by ships.
It is unreasonable to expect that any “naval civ” should be favored against any “non naval civ” on any map where we can build ships.
And Huns are listed as a top civ on a map scandinavia whete you can fight on water.
I would be very intetested to know why you specifically mentioned “Bengalis” being weaker than Gurjaras and not making into any top 5, and neither Portuguese or Koreans or Saracens, who are labeled as naval…
4 Likes
Thematic reason. Gurjaras should not be the water civ.
1- The question was not “Why Bengalis”, but “Why Bengalis alone and not other naval civs like Korean, Saracens, Portuguese”
2- Gurjaras is not a water civ, and are not a top civ on any full water map. They are 2nd on some hybrid maps that suit cavarly and ships, not only ships. They are not water maps. Otherwise we could argue that island is a land map because there are pieces of land.
5 Likes
Huns Lithuanian Gurjaras should not be in top five.
And Bengalis, Koreans, Portuguese should get some positions in top five.
It is a crime the true water civs are actually not good water civs.
confirmation bias is real
or do you really think sicilians are the 2nd best naval civ? or do we gloss over this part so you can be right?
SOTL is amazing, but he isnt perfect and isnt covering everything in every video, he even said we should take t this for entertainment reasons, for example lower picked civs are going to skew WRs (in both directions) ie sicilians
nevermind that bengalis dont HAVE to be one of the top 5 naval civs, now you’re just grasping for straws
6 Likes
Let’s save the thread to talk about something useful, I have to be honest, after the Mill nerf, Gurjaras dark age/early feudal feel strong but not oppressive anymore. Something like Mongols or Khmer if played right is probably faster/more aggressive.
Which leads me to note that Gurjaras are most likely fine until late Castle/early Imp, their ONLY OP thing at the moment is the Chakram or Chakram/Shrivamsha combo (spammable forever from as low as 110 pop). Kshatriyas exacerbates the issue but even without the UT, probably Gurjaras would have one of the most pop-efficient 200 pop armies in the game (here I wanna remind that there are basically 2 ways to be pop efficient on 200 pop, either play from 100-110 vills, and have a not very good army, but cheap and spammable and have a HUGE army size (Byzantines, Gurjaras fall here), or play from 130-140 pop and make an unbeatable deathball (Mongols, Franks if they go Paladin route etc. fall here). Removing Kshatriyas would make the Gurjaras army more expensive, but Chakrams, even if they cost more food, would still be OP.
Nerf disco throwers by making them perform badly vs one of the 2 armor types (melee and pierce), and most likely Gurjaras are fine ish.