Totally not surprising, goes well with the tournament’s data.
Actually I’m a bit surprised how low are rated Cumans for the map.
It tends to be really open, so using the second TC runs a higher risk than on other maps or previous generations.
practically 50% off military buildings besides barracks, perfect archers until Castle, better than FU knights, feudal siege. If extra TC is all you see in Cumans earlygame, it makes sense you’d rate them low.
Absolutely no reason to rate them below A-
I’m not talking about my rating, I’m just providing possible justification for why they got given B-. I personally agree with you and think they should be at least A+.
75 less wood on stable/archery range doesn’t seems to be enough for the civ to be competitive.
The thing with -100 wood was that it was OP on EW. (Also 75 W for a 3x3 building was quite low cost for quickwalling.
As this is almost the only real bonus the civ can use it’s not surprising it has that low state currently.
IDK maybe they could give some weird bonus to the cumans steppe lancers (Maybe remove cuman mercenaries but make a tech that removesthem additional attack. They could even switch that to castle age as steppe husbandry is actually more a lategame tech if ever researched.)
It would actually offer some “playing ground” to figure out how to make steppe lancers more viable.
He made the point that this is a ladder tier list, not a tournament tier list. as in, pick it, see your matchup, figure out what you want to do. That gives it a lot more potency for both early pressure and early boom. You don’t need to commit as heavily to defense when you see Byzantines, and you’re much more easily able to keep up when you load in and you see Aztecs.
That effect is being underrated to a serious degree.
I don’t agree with Aztecs, I will never agree with Aztecs.
Mayans do literally everything Aztecs do in 95% of the situations, just cheaper, faster, and with better eco.
Rest is alright, I’d argue that Bulgarians are a bit higher up, but that might be personal bias because I have found decent success with them.
Oh lol I just saw the byzantines. Ridiculous.
Don’t underestimate aztec eco, they have one of the best feudal ecos. Especially with a lot of agression going on. And then the faster producing helps getting numbers advantages also.
The more feudal agression the better aztecs become.
And even without: In my calc sheet about booming Aztecs have actually a better boom than a lot of other civs like franks and so on. And this calc heavily disfavours Aztecs in any map where is something other than full boom.
Remember this is only for KOTD 4 arabia map, still it also show that many civs that underperform on normal arabia are doing better in KOTD (Byzantines are a clear example).
Also not having D or E tier is kinda odd because Goths, Spanish, and especially, Burmese, would be wayyyy lower.
That’s false, bloodlines scouts have been dominating late feudal for the past 20 years.
And aztec eco has only the +3 carry capacity. Correct me if I’m wrong, but the overall buff to your economy it provides is about the same as berber faster villagers. Wheelbarrow is like 10% to farmers, berbers has 5% better farmers, I assume wheelbarrow without the speed buff is 5% as well.
Aztecs were nerfed to the ground, and their units are bad. Plain bad. No thumb ring, no halberdier, UU is relatively useless, etc. I don’t like aztecs, might be a personal preference, but I think they are just not a great civ. A good civ, but not a great civ.
Yeah I’m not too sure how a 41% winrate there puts them in A tier. I see where ornlu is coming from, but without an eco bonus and a good power unit to carry their castle and imperial ages, they are nothing special. They have been seeing some buffs recently, free town patrol is nice, but… Free town patrol, come on. A free town patrol doesn’t push them from C tier to A tier.
Just wrong. Archers are the best feudal units. Just because they don’t cost food.
Nope, the 10% faster vills are almost no eco bonus. Berbers farmers (where this bonus has the most influence actually) work only .5 % faster than standard ones. Aztecs farmers about 5% faster (and other res also 1.5 % faster). Sotl also discussed that in one of his vids. It’s a very strong eco bonus that adds up especially in extended feudal battles. Perfect for current arabia meta.
Well that’s your opinion. As long as there are people considering them s tier and picking them and winning with them we won’t see any buff to them for sure.
Meanwhile they continue to be one of the premier picks st the pro level. So whats thwt say?
Only with farms that are like 2-3 Tiles away from the TC (So roughly a second layer of farms around a TC or Mill) for farms right next to the TC, Berbers only gain a 2-3% increase, whereas with Aztecs it’s 9ish%.
SOTL that covers this
I will repeat that. Get it inside your head. Bloodlines scouts have been dominating the LATE feudal for the past 20 years.
The current arabia meta is some aggression into 30 something vil castle age. Nothing extended.
I don’t believe this, someone pull up the SOTL video.
I don’t know what it says. Both mayans and incas have a higher winrate than aztecs in KOTD thus far.
It’s a good civ, don’t get me wrong. But it’s not a great civ. If they aren’t first up to castle they struggle a lot. And what we have seen them usually perform is one TC eagle spam. Aztecs are one trick ponies, the only decision you have to take with them is whether you go for the eagles in early castle or early imp.
I personally have never struggled against aztecs, just wall and make enough army, their scalability is one of the worst.
Well, still. For a civ that doesn’t use farms much it’s not that big. It’s like slavs in feudal and berbers later, except everything slavs make uses a ton of food, and the most food intensive unit aztecs use is the villager…
Those stats from aoestats are from back in early August and outdated.
As for kotd4 stats
Aztecs and mayans and both have been in 100% of all drafts. Meanwhile Inca has been in 20% of all drafts. That alone says alot about aztecs value at higher levels.
I disagree, Food is the most in demand resource pre-Late Imp given that you require large amounts of it for nearly every upgrade, villagers and aging up. Slavs mainly use a ton of Food due to their tech tree shoe horning them into units that are Food intensive to train and or upgrade, the main exception being Monks. You can see the benefit of what a very strong food bonus can do for a civ with weak Food units in Vikings
The farming bonus + 11% faster training military units + 50 extra gold does allow Aztecs to do things faster than Mayans (who have a slighty slower farming rate than a generic civ)which is the main thing considered on an aggressive map, but yeah I agree with the other two things. Mayans handily outclass Aztecs Late-Castle onwards in terms of options and eco on open maps
Agreed, maybe it’s because high level players are able to leverage the defensive bonuses incredibly effectively, but Byzantines to me seem to have absolutely nothing going for them economically or aggressively before they can take advantage of their cheaper Imperial Age. Perhaps somebody can explain to me why they are so highly rated by Ornlu? Something like Cumans just seems so much better in comparison to Byz