MEXICO CIV need to be nerfed, they are too OP

Mexico is need to be balanced since last update they got a lot off buff, and probably considered over powered than other civ.


For example?

20 chara

También era la civilización más débil hasta que descubrieron como sacarla adelante

Revolts mechanic in both Supremacy and Treaty.

65 food effective trash unit.

Cheap salteador at age 4 that can transform into soldado via card

Chinaco that counters 2 units so its slightly outside of the weakness triangle

Haciendas that can do 4 things and spawn units for FREE too if you send some cards

The list goes on bro. Lol


Eh, they really aren’t OP except in the Lategame imo. They take a lot of cards to get to the OP stage of the game.

1 Like

I dont think its op, but its definetly overdesigned imho. when not fullining my obligations of “hating otto” for such trivuial things such as skirms that kill5/6 unit types, i often have railed against mexico. not because every aspect of its op, in fact most its features would be fine alone. tanky fast skirms? ok. a more scalalble naginate? sure, every civ should have some flavor and the mexican cav irl was quite competent and colorful. pikis? ok. 2 revolts with a gazzilion multi effect cards? uhhhhh. federal card system as well that also for 0 reason gets kept with revolt decks so even more better res valued cards can be combo’d? ok please slow down no, oh what that s tier musk right out the gate with 0 card support needed ok maybe slow down wait 85 pop eco thats better so extra units and super eco building thats a tower/mill/estate for just 600w wtf…wait theres more?? plan cards to swap stuff around?? surely this is limited elsewhere oh wait they get every single basic good card like 2x factory (with special heal cause F u thats why) 2 falcs good value shipments crates normal etc. wooooooo

so when you play mexico you can do w/e you want with 0 downside and this is fun for the mexican player. However, the opponent who civs were designed with this concept of “balance of strengths and weaknesses” feels bad as mexico breaks all the rules and does so cost effective or on par as them. you an age2 civ? mexico FIs and shits shadowtech royal guard lancers cause screw you. or they do thee 2nd fastest FF and out eco you via Central America. or they all in rush you. you an ff civ? get all in by musks with high siege, who cares every otherr rush civ has brakes on seige for this reason eat outlaw not costed for the free 200 pop space like lakota has too!! you a boom civ? they FF and ship 7, 7, and a bunch of boats back to back then FI with 50% more vills. is this beatable? yeah and after many many many many painful matches, i usually do ok. its balanced in the win rate sure. but boy, this feels miserable to face being sucker punhced over and over with one mistake costing you the game, and mexico splits the playerbase into 2 camps: those who love the pure range of options available to them and the others who know how limited their options are into mexico since again, mexico can flex in and out of most builds as they please. revolts that skip an age? or revolt when pressured. or send a card that swaps units etc.

Now some chucklehead will say “buuuuut platy mehico only % win rate stats never lie” the civ is hardly explored. infact, most mexican mains dont even bother learning half their cards cause they can bot their civ as they please. this means every few months, when people take a look at the civ, they realize things like “oh wow maybe baja isnt pure bad 20 mini soldados and uber goon at 530 hmmmm.” like they did to CA after people had enough of the mexican players “buuuut i must have cannons and age3 towers at 6 min for free” the fact you can have 50% win rate or around there suggests simply, people are winning half their games. also the poor treaty crew isnt counted in those and mexico is just above and beyond op in that mode.

now before the mexican mains get too upset, i actually like the civ. i think alot of the hate isnt warranted and i agree compared to some civs (glares at usa/italy fort/hausa) at the moment its not that OP. but its certainly not weak and i am a firm believer, just as in malta cannons needed to be fixed and italy still needs some tweaks in their architects, mexico is a bit overdesigned and will find more broken builds or be top once their underutulized stuff is figured out and the current op is nerfed… i doubt anything will change at the moment, but if baja picks up popularity people will realize how nasty that option is and be upset.

honorable mention for the 10 skirm shipment in age2 of fast skirms that kill villagers, cause lakota speed killing vills is bad but mexico gets 3x shipment to do so :frowning:


I do think the x1.25 multiplier vs hand cav for Chinacos needs to be removed. It makes them have only a single counter.


Spawning Settlers can be locked by a Age III card in my opinion.


in the treaty Mexico is ridiculously strong, all its booming is functional and is good (some more than others).
Native build is ridiculously strong, the susten of the yukatan revo is strong, the gold support of the baja cali revo is good, the outlaw build with California and Baja California is good, Rio grade revo makes the units absurdly strong, apart from that in the andes map the explorer can train soldados instantly in the explorer with this build, nor comment on the Mayans.
the weakest builds are Texas and cali revo.
That are off meta but functional.


Bruh, everybody is saying México is in a pretty bad position right now, in every update the civ receives more nerfs than bufffs. The only time it was op was when it was launched together with USA, and now Mexico does not compare to how good its sister civ is at this moment, it has been forgotten by devs.
Most players consider it a bad civ, at its best low A tier, and that is being generous because it requires a lot of ability to make it work decently.

The proof is in the low pick rate it has for tournaments and its poor performance.


I think the main complaints were about its lategame abilities. Which are numerous and super good.


It’s the same thing as always, they accuse Mexico of being OP because they don’t know the civ and its mechanics.
I don’t blame them, there are a thousand things you can do with it using all the mechanics you mentioned. But that’s the purpose of civilizations like USA/MEX, taking away all that versatility would make them flat and repetitive like the essence of European civilizations.

Let’s also not forget to mention that all this versatility comes at the cost of being civilizations that are difficult to learn and play. Certain mechanics only work in specific scenarios and situations and for nothing else.


Want to play a treaty game with me 1v1 tr 40 and I’ll go with Mexico.
Because then you will understand the complaint about why Mexico is broken.
Late game of Mexico is simply bizarre and strong.
civ has the best eco susten in the game, has very strong and consistent booming , and has very powerful units.


No USA and Mexico arent strong because people not knowing the civ, thats a native americans issue, that has been overnerfed.

USA/Mx have a lot of lame strats hard to balance due to their versatility. But thats not a reson to have OP strategies. For example Chinacos shouldnt have bonus vs both infantry and cavalry at the same time or Mayan units are too strong (plus infinite spearmen, a nosense)


You guys are talking about different things one is treaty one is normal game.

1 Like

This is not an argument defending them. Besides the classic excuse of “welll uhhh play them you just dont get it” Complexity should not = better civ. Thats should be opposite, the more flexible a civ is the less powerful each individual option. Ideally your ability to draw from various options means you cant bot a build but have to actually make the right counter. We see that at times on how salties and pikis have counter, and most federal cards are a weird mix of abilites that do more things but not always optimal. Like the 1 hacienda 20 pop space or thankfully nerfed mihocan boat card. Or tabasco vet salties/san luis chinacos, timing it means everything. Here is where this core design of flexibility works and the civ is fine infact really cool.
I know how the civ works. Infact where i find mexico BS is because i get how the civ works. Ive played them in small events 1v1 and teams.

Whats bs and will always be is that this paired with same time the op/dumb revolts. You have an unscoutable all in rush or an effective 530 fast fort. AND you keep your federal cards cause…like f the whole design of what a revolt deck should be ig. Baja has the cheesefest of monopolies that have been banned in every team tournament and a plethora of overtuned goons, a factory, and ability to unrevolt to age4 cause again, to hell with the entire point of an all in. Then there is CA which is like lmao falcs or the best safest FI in the game cause like why should mexico suffer? 7 vills is 3.5 minutes better than paying for vills by then you could get again 6 or 7 vills cause you also can ship their scaling vill card so the timer never really stops in a realistic age3 play. A cheaper FI and faster FI into some of thr most undercosted age4 shipments in the game. This is before we get into the cheesefest of revolting AGAIN to such fun things as botto mexifornia goon spam mk2 or texas which i like tbh now it cant poop 35+ vills from a supposedly all in revolt. This is where i say ita overdesigned, too much all at once for 1 civ. It takes you time to learn imagine being a person learning their civ and you have to learn effectively 4 or 5 civs in 1 to play vs mexico and 1 mistke is gg. Ofc people sick of that after a few matches and i cant blame them

Ofc whats even funnier is how mexican mains complain they get 21 cards, thrn stack thr deck in age2 and 4 and get via revolts overtuned to age3 stat cards (cept CA finally) like damn dude wish i could ignore age3 and get all the solid shipments…oh and ofc revolt counts as federal so you still age4 with 25 cards. Hmmm wheres the downsides?

Will mexico beat usa atm? Probably not. Is it A tier? Yes. Is it still full of put simply, undercosted shipments and units and will once people stop botting the age2>CA>age4 combo they might discover things like discount wigncourt free guard skirms, pikis with more dps than musk, better botto with 3 factories, etc. But for now just as we saw with usa, and so often with AR civs, the complexity means until people approach it with new eyes they will use nerfed strats and call it bad.

Again, i play it every event even tho im not pro nor claim to be, because i can screw any opponent over but spain or for some reason haude/azzies. Its just as you said taking time. I dont want the civ to die, but if you just compare deck value timings and unit stats its clear mexico is up there. Small changes like the 200w cost for towers (3x age3 towers at 530 instant screwed too many civs) or maybe swap 700w crates for 600w ensures the civ remains the rube goldberg machine of big brain plays while limiting its “lmao me make better units with better cards hahaha 10 age2 cards 10 age4 no downside all equal to or better to your civs cards gg ez nobo” that unfortunately mexico has been known for. I want to earn my cheeky adelante!


Yeah, Mexico is still broken in treaty with their anti-everything chinacos, and tons of resources with their wood trade. Seems that the devs never will fix that.


For many people normal game=treaty game,

for them yes. my point is you guys argueing over different things completely w

theres like 100 ways to play mexico .its fun and i dont think its OP

1 Like