maybe, but point is you said the nerfs were recent. only one recent nerf.
All irrelevant.
Malay are a top tier civ on Arena, and similarly defensively suited maps because of their extra villagers and the need to delay to capitalize on their boom advantage.
Just because the Malay are not keeping up with Aztecs on Arabia doesn’t mean they need buffs.
its not just aztecs they aint keeping up with. its literally everybody.
1 ban, by the viper iirc, 0 picks, 0 plays.
1 Like
Yes, which is irrelevant, when you are talking about a civ that is top tier on Arena and water maps.
Yeah, let’s send the fishing civ with the great economy to the Sahara. This is going to work great.
The proposition is foolish.
Oh no. The Water and Arena civ isnt picked into the top 33% of most aggressive Arabia civs… And whether they are picked zero times or 4 times that is the same category in my view because that stat could be changed easily if some pros would troll more like TheViper
first of all, its not the top 33%. they aren’t even top 80%.
second of all, Arena and Water make up something like less then 15% of all maps played on ladder, and how many in tournaments?
not a very big percentage is it? should we nerf Vikings down to there level too?
2 Likes
Uh. You could easily make the argument that the Vikings do indeed need to be nerfed, by all accounts. Their eco is amazing, their army is versatile and effective, and they can perform practically any strategy well enough to win with it prior to Imperial. They also excel on practically every map.
really bad example tbh. I do like that one suggestion to make Wheelbarrow take less time for research to make it a worse eco bonus for the Vikings as an intermediary move, though.
nerfed. yes. nerfed into obscurity? no.
Top 80% is not what KoTD test for. When 16 civs are picked in a bo5 we talk about 45% of the civs (sorry for my very rough and bad estimate). With some outliers we can go to 60% max. So malay being in the lower 40% of arabia civs sounds well.
Why Vikings ? They are one of the worst Arena civs…
and one of the best civs in the game period, and a great water civ, better then malay with ease.
Malay are not in obscurity. They are a fantastic civ. Just because Arabia is getting all the play rate now doesn’t change that. Vikings are not better than Malay on arena, let’s just get that straight. Malay hands Vikings their wheelbarrow back in pieces on Arena.
so they are a fantastic civ on less then 15% of all maps they can play on. got it.
do you really think this whole “Everyone plays Arabia” is going to change? the fans literally asked for this. the whole prefered map system is BECAUSE people wanted to play Arabia.
1 Like
So what. You see how they suck on KotD arabia 
I dont know, why you change your argumentative line every post.
The game isn’t just Arabia. The game isn’t just the competitive scene that doesn’t want to turtle and wants to be aggressive. Much would be lost to the flavor of the game if the game ignored the map variety for a stricter balance on Arabia. The game would be worse for the effort.
they don’t suck on Arabia.
92% of drafts involved in.
11 times banned
yeah the win loss looks bad, but if you look at the wins vs loss seeding you’ll see they are overwhelmingly always chosen by the lower seeded player.
i’m not changing my argument every post - my argument is that every civ should be passable on the standard most played map the game has to offer.
tell that to the people playing it 3/4 of the time, and the fact that the map is usually played at least once every series of every tournament.
and yet they just made the arabia map more open and prone to aggression.
I’m fine with map variance like some civs being better on hybrid maps, some being better on Arena, but seeing as Arabia is the most standard map we have, every civ should be able to play passably well on it.
1 Like
Sure thing.
Guys, that map that you play once per series in any tournament not named “King of the Desert” is going to not be a map to play certain civs on. You’ll want to play civs that have a decent earlygame with either very good options or a penchant for aggression. If you play something else you’ll be at a disadvantage. Sound good?
The Tournament is an arabia tournament. It tells us how good civs are on Arabia. If we want a civ to be good there, and we’ve designed it to be so, this is a great tournament to judge that at the highest level and tweak anything we might deem necessary or reasonable. If we haven’t necessarily designed a civ to be good there or expect them to be so, we shouldn’t care unless they are overperforming (looking at you, Vikings) and that should go without saying.
The next tournament isn’t going to be all arabia, all the time, and you’ll see plenty more civ variety as a result. Kinda like that’s how the game, and how things work, go to different areas, see different people. Then we’ll see a wide variety of people making the same complaints you are now for totally unrelated reasons because reason is to be abandoned in this place.
I am not going to push for balance based off popularity in the general populace, and I’m certainly not going to expand popular opinion onto the options chosen on the most popular map by the best players in the world when they are forced to pick that map
why isnt there a king of the woods tournament would show some variety and different strength of cics
1 Like
Fatslob, thine time is nigh!
1 Like
dont think everyone would fatslob there 11
Thing with mayans and chinese is that you have good melee options through the entire game which isn’t the case for other archer civs.
It’s definitely closer to kotd3 ara but I wouldn’t say it’s as aggressive because you still have the potential to have more woodlines, you have less elevation around your base (which makes walling less effective) and you have green arabia generations which are easier to wall in general. So, yes, sometimes the ladder arabia is as open as kotd ara but I’d say not as consistently. This should make civs like britons or vietnamese more effective, here. For some people these differences might not sound huge but remember that pro players pick their civs in tournament based on nunances that don’t matter all too much for the broader player base.
The point about malay really is the walling potential. If you can’t wall with them early on it’s not a great civ. For instance, on the arabia invitational a couple of months ago which was on the old arabia malay were picked frequently and performed very well.
How so? For sure not a top arena civ but they are pretty decent and are commonly seen in arena tournaments. Most clowns rate them above average.
True but if your point is that malay isn’t passable, here, that’s not the case. Just because you don’t see them in one particular torunament doesn’t mean there aren’t viable on arabia.
1 Like