Nerf of Inca tower rush, possibile solution

The villagers with bonus from blacksmith + stone buildings costing less + doing bonus damage against walls is a very powerful combination and after like 6 months of this game where basically this civ almost never fail the tower rush and 90% of inca players use this strategy, the problem hasn’t been addressed yet. Anything you throw to stop the rush will slow your eco as well as his, so he is not scarifying anything for this push.

My solution is not give them upgrade of guard tower in castle age . So they can still do this but at castle age, if the enemy hasn’t been taken, their investment in all of their towers is almost futile and will make them rethink in feudal if the investment is worthy. They receive back the keep upgrade in imperial age. Or there could be other better solutions as well.

It doesn’t work like that


Add a bonus in their civ that upon reaching imperial age, they get a free tech which is guard tower. But is one suggestion, there could be better ones.

Hi RoomOfTheEvil, welcome back with a new thread about an overpowered civ! Keep up the good work!

I hate being tower rushed and Incans are one of (maybe even the best) tower rush civ in the game. Let’s have a look at some statistics about the Incas. I will use the following page.

They win around 51% of the games. That seems pretty balanced to me. They peak in games below 20 minutes or between 30-40 minutes. They lost most of the games between 20-30 minutes or after 40 minutes. I think we can say they are good in Feudal age and early imperial age. If you have a closer look at their performance per ELO you will say they mainly peak during early imp. The higher the level of the player, the weaker the perform in feudal age.

You wanna nerf the castle age. This is already a weaker period for Incans. Also they dont really seems overpowered at any stage of the game. On higher levels (ELO 1650+) their winrate even dropped below 50%, because pros seems to have no issue at all with the incans in feudal age.

I dont really see a reason to just nerf incans. They seems fine to me. Even i hate the tower rush.


Forgive me if I’m missing something, but since when did Inca vills get bonus damage vs walls?

please don’t nerf the inca tower rush.
It makes the game so much more interesting as a whole and it’s the main thing that makes incas a good civ.
if anything nerf ■■■■■■■ chinese/britons/mayan m@a into xbows, that’s just as viable, if not more. (don’t actually do that, both of those are fine)
thank you


He probably means villagers’ regular bonus dmg against buildings.

I agree that it’s really annoying and lately Incas seem to be reduced to that strat. But essentially there hasn’t been anything changed what would make the vill rush more vialble than in the past. Trushes were even nerfed in DE because of that less tower hp in feudal. It was just this strategy becoming more and more poular over time, especially in the recent months because of casters hyping it and increased usage in tournaments. And if sergenti will indeed be included in the next map pool I guess we will see it even more frequently.

Imo at some point pepole will learn how to defend against that and then it’ll be fine. Still doesn’t make it less annoying but tbh I don’t see what could be done here because that blacksmith vill bonus is the key which can’t be changed. And awkward changes such as not giving them guard tower in castle age might only drag people even more in full feudal aggression. You also don’t want to take away the stone building bonus because that’s useful for a lot of other strategies as well.


I have no idea why you take those stats are perfectly truth. It lists that they have 100% win rate against veitnamese and 0% against berbersin 1650+ which is not possible. It is a very approximate number. Maybe a few more couple of months and it will really tell how are the civs. Also according to those graphs, their games gets better at 25+ min which is mostly still castle in 1v1.

It is kinda tricky to balance. That is why i suggested a nerf for their towers. I don’t have other ideas.

The graphs are based on the data. If you can see there arent many Inca picks in 1650+: Just 97. Considering 35 civs, on average you have played each civ 3 times. Probably you played against a civ like Persians more than 3 times, but other maybe just 1-2 times. It is pretty much possibel Inca - Vietnamese and Inca - Berbers just happens both once. Those winrate dont say anything at this moment. There is too less data. So dont look at the winrate against other civs.

So i was just looking at their global winrate. Since there are almost 100 games at the highest level, this percentage wont really change much anymore. I also just looked at the other ELO-levels that are shown. In total there are 7062 Inca picks with a winrate of 50,91%. 7062 is a large enough data set to have some conclusions. You dont really need more. If you wont believe me, just calculate the confidence interval. It will say the true winrate will be between 50-52% with a 95% confidence interval.

Also i just dont only look at there winrate, but also their graph. How does there winrate change over time. It seems like there winrate will drop for games below 20 minutes if elo goes up, anything else seems pretty stable over time. It is just a fact that pro can deal with tower rushes more easily. It is even better if the pros know the tower rush is coming. Picking Inca is just knowing there is a tower rush coming on high level. So other team can prepare. At lower levels tower rushing is much more a success for the tower rusher, since most players dont really know how to deal with the tower rush. This is just what you see in the graphs per elo level. Also even at lower levels, there are much more games. I dont think you are a pro (please tell me your RM 1v1 rating if i am wrong), so their winrate per time are pretty stable and is a good enough approximation to draw conclusions.

You also dont really understand the graph. It just shows 4 points:
They just connect the dots. If you hover over the dots, they show you the info.

The guard tower upgrade isn’t that big of a deal for a tower rush, and many trushers don’t even bother to get it even when they easily could. What this hcnage would do is to make Incas even less likely to use defensive towers since guard towers are really important n that role.

What originally made Incas a good civ is the starting llama that prevents any risk of a bad start, the fact they are harder to raid, and the fact they have the most options among american civs. Of course, the best way to deal with the tower rush frenzy is to wait for people to get bored of it (I mean seriously, if it was that OP then why isn’t the best player in the world Noboru 11)

He isn’t wrong on this one tho: the stats he pointed out really show that there is going to be a lot of inconcistence in some stats, and that waiting for more games to be played is a better move to draw conclusions.

Well, I think Inca tower rush is the kind of strategy that if used at a low level, will basically allow you to cheese your way up the ladder because many players already have a hard enough time to stick to their gameplan, so they won’t be able to adapt to such a brutal pressure. So you could say the Inca winrate is actually not consistent, like Chinese who on the other hand win less with low ELO because they are harder to play.


If you hate to be tower-rushed, you may stop to play the game…
At this game, there are many rush strategies. Somebody may destroy your houses, towncenters, barrack, Stables, Castles, kill you villagers.
All these things may make you angry…

Other players become better at the game and use tower rush to attack enemies too… They also may use the Inca civ.

1 Like

This and a variety of mediocre infantry is about all they have going for them. You want to nerf them? Naw man. Incas is a solid Civ, but far from being OP. No changes to them are necessary. They’re about as perfectly balanced as Vikings or Mongols.

1 Like

I’ve been saying for a long time that Vietnamese Military is very underwhelming for how expensive it is. The problem lies there.

A bad start is now much more unlikely than it used to be in HD (maybe even impossible, im not completely sure)

I do think, the noboru rush is really strong and underappreciated, but it surely isn’t OP and if it’s not OP it doesn’t need fixing.


He is wrong on thise one tho. Yeah, if you wanna compare Incan to just one other civ only for high elo you dont have enough games. I didnt say anything about this data, since i know there is too less data to draw conclusions on that level. I was talking about the general winrate of civs. For that winrate there is enough data.

If you just wanna compare the global civ win rate of a civ to other civs, you have enough data. 7062 is pretty much enough for really small confidence intervals. Just calculate those. There is no reason to say there winrate will not be around 50-52%. If a strategy is completely broken, this percentage would be much higher. 50-52% seems pretty balanced to me. Even if you would make it 46-56% if you want a wider range, that win rate is pretty fine. There is really no reason to assume Incan are too strong and need a nerf.

Here we are inca tower rush in the tournament and mr yo still had way better eco than his opponent because the raids to him tickle him and his villagers are simply better. He didn’t even wall because he didn’t care.
And the inca have a winning strike in the tournament like the vikings.

It’s not like some people in this very same tournament did lose while using the Inca trush as well. If it truely was that OP then Incas would have been banned just like Chinese were.


inca have i believe a 100% win rate in this tournament. and again, their eco is so strong that even without tower rush they win.

Just some remarks at the tournament:

  • Empire Wars is a pretty new game mode without a real meta. Also it is not completely comparible with Random Map. So we can really draw conclusions for Random Map from this tournament.

  • The number of games is pretty low to really have winrate by civ. Even all matches in april with Elo Incans werent enough to draw conclusions.

  • Some of the best players are pretty good in tower rushing and making the game messy. These players will most likely pick Incan and win. This type of players will pick Inca. Other players has other specialties, so they dont wanna pick Inca.

Based on these notes, i dont think we can conclude Inca tower rush is OP from the tournament.

I much admit, i tried the Inca tower rush too today. It ended up in a easy win for me. I dont think i can conclude it was because the Inca tower rush. There were other factors too:

  • I stole 2 sheeps, so i could delay some farms. He was already scouting my base, but since he hadnt found these sheeps, i decided to took them.

  • I had fletching, he didnt. This was his mistake. This made tower rushing much more easy for me.

  • It was the map Serengenti. You already have just one boar, and have to adapt BO, but enemy was also 2 sheeps down. Since i was on the attack, i can easily take extra deers too. He couldnt get them, because they were towered. I was lucky and one of the patches of deer spawned just next to the berries. No luring or another mill or huge walking times of vills needed.

I feel like the same enemy on Arabia and without stolen 2 sheeps would have play out different.

So yes, Incan tower rush felt strong, but i need to try this civ more. For example: I didnt even had a vill fight, so i dont really know how strong the vills felt in a vill fight.

1 Like