If Franks are an 8.5, Mayans and Chinese are 9.75, Burmese are a 5 and Goths are a 4, rate the new civs on Arabia-like maps (i.e. Arabia, Socotra etc.)
Bengalis:
0 voters
Dravidians:
0 voters
Hindustanis:
0 voters
Gurjaras:
0 voters
Assuming goths is 4 what would a completely generic civ with average tech tree be? Can new civs even go below 3? 11
Also socotra isn’t really like arabia (bohemians and berbers two of the top civs for instance)
I only voted hindustani because i dont have the DLC (waiting until christmas). If someone want me to vote, I can tell them my steam account so they can buy me the DLC 
top civs for Socotra are still Scouts + Towers civs (better if both), so still Bulgarians, Chinese etc. I reckon are stronger.
maybe like 5-6?
probably not since I feel in the current state of the game no civ is “unplayable”. For what it’s worth I voted 3 for Gurjaras cuz imo they are THAT bad atm. They literally have a bad Archery range (Elephant archer LOL) with no Parthian Tactics and no last armor, a SUPER bad Barracks and an average at best Stable (supposed to be their selling point).
Scouts is completely irrelevant on socotra. In that regard it’s basically like arena in that you don’t care much about mobility. You do see knights sometimes if one player has timing advantage but that’s only bc of base stats. Archers are pretty common which is why chinese and mayans are still great. Other than that laming, vill fight and trush civs (berbers, goths, poles, teutons) are good and civs with good UU are decent as well. But it’s really not like arabia. Cav and ca civs you barely see for instance.
I don’t agree with your rating. Chinese worse than Frank’s? Goth worse than Burmese?
Anyway hindustan are 10/10.
I don’t own the dlc