May patch (preliminary) stats

Aoe stats has published the initial stats from most recent patch.

Burgundians seem balanced at pro level but too much OP at very low ELOs (maybe due to flemish revolution?

On the contrary, Sicilians seem balanced at lower levels but UP at higher ELOS.

Incas seem fine.

Burmese may need help. And malay (it is curious how there are 3 Rise of rajas civs within the bottom 5 civs among all players)

Of course, those are not definitive stats, so they can change after some weeks. For instance, people could learn how to defeat flemish revolution. But now we can talk supported by some kind of data.

Looks like this could be merged into the other thread about this topic.


No harm intended :S it’s easy to miss a similar topic, especially if was recently created

1 Like

Incas are absolutely not fine, they have the 5th worst pickrate in 1v1 and 2nd worst in TGs. Which is expected when you take a rather boring civ and nerf the only thing that made this civ stand out.

From a balance point of view this won’t affect the game too much (there are already many bad civs) but it is scary how the identity of a civ can be arbitrarily ruined in one patch.

1 Like

Oh, I did not see the TGs stats. If they are so bad there, its the perfect chance to replace their TEAM bonus by something useful (i propose extra militia LOS).
And if we wanted to buff them in feudal age but not in later stages, the only thing I can think is free scale mail armor… So their infantry gets a power spike in feudal (useful against/for trushing), and it garrants a minor boost to villagers in castle age before getting the second upgrade.

This would not make anyone pick the civ, still.

Team bonus usually are weak or niche. I proposed the stronger bonus outside the time bonus because of that.

1 Like

That is a good point too. I guess it would be still more useful than the current mill bonus for sure. I don’t really know where to take the civ. Most obvious solution would be revert it, or just remove the civ, given that it currently is obsoleted by the other meso civs.

Not related to this patch, but I feel the same way about Burmese, either do something with the Arambai or just remove the civ, because it adds nothing to the game currently.

I think incas are actually one of the most interesting and versatile civs in the game.
Solid eco, strong FU lines. A well rounded and a specialised UU. Well protected eco and forwarding potential. An insane imp UT, almost instant win against all archery civs.
They have answers to basically everything, they have time to answer and their eco actually allows them to be way more proactive than the other versatile civs like byzantines.

Incas are actually one of the most interesting civs in the game, but their uniqueness is maybe also a bit of a burden for them. As learning incas makes you very specialised. If you begin playing with incas, you can’t really swap to other civs as easy and the other way around. Because Incas are so unique.

Pre-nerf, I would agree. I used to start off players that I invited to the game with generic civs like Franks, but some people really have a hard time dealing with feudal pressure, and Incas were a godsend, because their vills were tanky enough for feudal age, so noobs could feel comfortable, and learn feudal pressure without getting absolutely curbstomped. Unfortunately the ultimate noob-friendly option is gone :frowning:

That might be useful in a 1v1 megarandom map, but in more general cases like 1v1 Arabia or Team Games, being a generalist is just not useful, because most of the times you’ll want to play based on the strength/advantages of your civ. Incas had everything geared towards a strong feudal. They have a wide tech tree, but in itself that doesn’t help much. (The free Llama and efficient houses don’t matter for late game, and the blacksmith bonus gets less and less relevant in later game stages)

Incas are better 1v1 civ than:



We wouldn’t need pick rates if we weren’t able to pick civs :sunglasses: