KOTD drafts and bans

There’s already a KOTD stats discussion, but it seems to be going off on a tangent, so I’m opening a new thread :man_shrugging:

It’s interesting to me that Aztecs, Chinese and Mayans have been banned a lot (respectively 68, 60 and 68 games out of 80 according to KotD4 stats - Google Sheets)

Why is there no strategy where 2 of the top civs get left open, so that both the first pick player and the 2nd pick player get an uber-civ?
Is it just that the first-pick player also gets the last ban, so that if the second-pick player leaves 2 good civs in the draft he gets shafted? Or is there something more going on?

If that’s what’s going on and a small rule change could result in Aztecs and Mayans being seen more often, though I can’t say whether that’d make it more enjoyable for me to watch.

I honestly don’t get this ban thing.
If they’re so overpowered that they need to be banned everytime, then it’s time to nerf them. What’s the purpose of the ban system? Not showing how strong some civs are, to avoid the nerf hammer?

1 Like

The point of this ban system is exactly not seeing Aztecs, Mayans and Chinese :rofl:

We’ve seen these civs for years, on every previous tournament those civs were always picked for arabia, it’s great to actually see something else.


Drafting has been ruining strategy development since it was introduced back at 2015-2016 in aoe2 events, the old good rule about use whatever civ you want + no repeat was the best rule to find out the most competitive civs, ever since captain modes and the draft ban and snipe, players get a huge handicap by winning the draft rather than the games, you may hear or read some pro player claiming they won the draft or lost the draft instead of saying they lost the games because that is how important the civs are and how much anyone can ruin your preparation for such events by removing everything you were practicing.

Zero empires started the draft and ban system back at rise of rajas to prevent the broken civs to rule their events, if we have kept that system it only means we are still afraid of some civs despite the never ending balance changes.

The only reason we have seen more civs aoe2 events is due drafting hiding the poor balancing and restricting OP civs or strats for certain users at the end of the day we always see the same safe civ and strategy choices in aoe2 events with little variations.

Without drafting and ban systems, the balancing process would have been easier and faster long ago.

I don’t think that’s a totally fair assumption. You can easily say bans survived as the result of more effective testing of civilizations, rather than a fear of broken ones. Certain players may also prefer certain civilizations, and denying them that option is a way to force them to show breadth of quality, not just depth of quality.

Drafting is a separate issue. Making civilization selection a tactic in and of itself is questionable, but I think it makes a lot of sense for this game in particular, since there’s such a wide variety of maps to play.

Which leads me to this: If you can’t ban the meta from the meta players, what makes you think you’ll “figure out” anything meaningful about the rest of the civs that the meta players ignore? Pushing the players who have the greatest interest in figuring out a competitive edge towards other civs is a very efficient way to see what’s what. Ergo, I disagree entirely.