Indians in battle royal

i mean this is the 2nd BR ive taken part in, the 1st one i didnt even capture a camp since i had no idea what i was supposed to do, i havent even watched a BR vid to date.

anyway… just on paper indians seem insane so long as you can get a castle the EA is just OP with super quick tt and infinite res, im assuming there will be other almost auto picks civs, and civs like malay or mesos are almost useless or what?

who else do you think is OP or UP in BR?


With infinite resources, EAs and WEs are OP, that is why they cost so much.

EAs are not a bad unit, just one you cannot afford in 1v1 Ranked.

Yes, Resource-efficient civs like Malay are useless in any Infinite Resources scenario.
There you want civs with very strong units, or very wide Tech Trees, ith a lot of Imperial Age options.

Until now, I won with Indians (mass Elephant Archers), Vietnamese (Elephant + Rattan Archer), Malay (navy, elephants, archers), Turks (gunpowder, hussar, CA), Khmer (Ballista Elephants), Saracens (siege onager, mamelukes/camels), Koreans a few times (especially battle on ice).

Civs with “power units” tend to do particularly well, like Persians and Khmer. Meso civs tend to be underpowered in Battle Royale.


Ok cool that’s good to hear malay can still do it. So Burmese might be even better than them then with their more pop efficient infantry + ele?

Either way it just seems like chaos…

I played an Indian game in BR and only got 3rd RIP. I did get to wipe out an enemy with ele archers and hand cannons only which was hilarious. Imp camels are good there too because of paladin civs being popular but unfortunately for me, turns out centurions have the same stats as cataphracts including the protection against anti-cav so camels are innefective against them.

On the general topic of OP/UP, having good HCA, siege onagers or heavy cav makes a civ quite good. Magyars get to choose between the best HCA in the game and paladins, Lith HCA are worse but they have the choice between leitis/palas, and Teutons have palas+siege onagers both with bonuses.
Civs that rely on cheaper units or fast creation speed will be worse (you can’t even feel the effect of perfusion!) and those which are too specialized will suffer from the fact you can’t always have the right building (the pain of being Celts and being forced to make HCA cuz no siege workshop)
Overuse of trash units is almost as effective as clicking the resign button to lose so civs that rely of them will have to forget about that option.

Overall I would say skill and luck have a lot of room to determine the outcome of the match despite all the differences in late-game potential. For instance I finished 2nd as Celts on the Teuton map without siege weapons, while every single enemy had a better navy and more pop efficient units than I did (pro tip: ships don’t have melee armours so just run your fastest soldiers into them and watch them melt instantly. There is a reason the achievement for killing a boat with a melee unit has always been more widespread than the one for luring boar in dark age 11)

1 Like

Malay have a strong combination of FU arbalests and battle elephants (even with missing armor they can be a good meat shield), and a strong navy. If you can pull it off, you can even spam karambits, which only take up half a pop spot, as cannon fodder.

I would only pick them on a water map though, otherwise I think Khmer is stronger.

1 Like

I also won one with Indians. Imp camel does nicely to counter BE which seem like a unit a lot of people like to go with, and Elephant archers are great.

1 Like

I have play some BR games and Indians never won. Just dont spend to much attention at 1-2 wins with the same civ. You might also be the best player in that game mode… The top 3-4 are most likely the players with highest RM 1v1 rating. That is at least my experience.


HC with extra range are nice to kill legionaries… Although they miss a lot of shots