People civ picking Gurjaras on ladder ruins the fun

Age of Empires II: DE II - Discussion
1

So normally I always semi-defended civ picking as a necessary evil, I’m a mostly random civ player myself but I understand some people could like the playstyle of some civs or not have the time to learn every tech tree in this game.

However, on Gurjaras, there is an influx of civ pickers in mid elos (I would say from 1400-1800 it starts being very oppressive) that ruin the fun for everyone. It’s like, Gurjaras once every 3 games. On a bad day, maybe even every other game. These people “cross the shield” too, so there is no chance to make them go random civ, and while beating Gurjaras is possible, it’s not a very worthwhile endeavor because very often it’s a case of beating the civ, not the player, the player behind it is quite horrible very often, but carried by so many crutch mechanics this civ has at basically any stage of the game (early game: Mill which is hard to break, feudal: Camel doing like 10 damage a hit to the Scout, early Castle age: Shrivamsha raid, mid Castle: Armored Elephant push, late Castle: boom into Kshatriyas and potential Chakram Thrower, late game: Kshatriyas army of Hussar/Shrivamshas/Chakrams.

I’m not exactly a fan of laming as I think it’s unfair and also inconsistent but I heard many say that the best way of beating Gurjaras is laming them. The problem is that it also prevents the game from becoming interesting, Gurjaras goes up 22-23 pop and it’s basically game over in Feudal already.

I think it’s important to address this because Franks or Mayans were always unfair, but to a reasonable level, if you kill 2 Mayan vills early Feudal, game isn’t over generally like it would be for other civs, but the Mayans still feel the pain. But Gurjaras, I’ve seen them come back from nearly anything.

I hope the civ is addressed next patch. Remember that it’s better to overnerf than not nerf enough in this case. There are currently A LOT of players in mid elos interested purely in gaining elo, no matter how unfair the method may be, and they spam Gurjaras every game. Because a 65% something winrate civ is SIGNIFICANTLY harder than beating your average 55% winrate Franks where you need to fend off early Feudal and Castle age timing and you basically win after.

Edit: honorable mention goes to Hindustanis which is also a civ I see VERY often. I am not sure about their winrate, and they aren’t THAT unfair, but still very strong and hard to beat (from my experience a bit harder than Franks but easier than Gurjaras).

7 Likes
2

Now you start feeling what is play against Franks and Mayans 11

8 Likes
3

It depends where your sensitivity to pain lies. I always tolerated Mayans, and have no problem with Franks, but Gurjaras are something else. Harder to beat and there is something unfair about them idk. I also have a feeling I go vs Gurjaras way more than your average mid elo Franks spammer.

3 Likes
4

Gurjaras are broken. The camel line destroys ny cav unit in the game, created from a stable. Make any other camel civ to shame and useless

1 Like
5

i think the problem is there to stay until devs finally aknowledge that gurjaras need heavy nerfs, instead of mild tweaks or even buffs like in the PUP. It’s only natural that if a civ is super duper strong it is going to be picked more often, because for the average non-random player, it would be like hampering yourself not to do so. what if your opponent picks gurjaras or gets gurjaras by random? you are toasted…so you pick stronger civs like hindustanis and gurjaras to have your slice of fun

it’s bad for the game, but it’s not player’s fault, it’s the DEVS. Hindustanis are getting rightly nerfed in a decent way (they will remain very strong imho but at least is a step in the right direction) but Gurjaras…man devs seem to be ok about them sitting at 60+ winrates

5 Likes
6

nt5r45
nt5r45936×513 48.8 KB

DOI DLC indeed reduced player numbers.

1 Like
7

That graph looks sus.

3 Likes
8

You mean not reliable?

9

Yes both Frank and Gurjaras are broken and they deserve a heavy nerf

3 Likes
10

It s the worst civ design that totally changes the meta. They should remove it completetly or nerf their camels to death. I tired of playing them again and again.

1 Like
11

I agree, in unranked TGs it’s even worse, where civ picking is more common, and I’d estimate Gurjaras have been present in at least 2/3rds of games. The existence of any civ that’s so much more powerful than the average civ means some tryhard is almost always going to choose them, which makes for a lot of very lame games, even with the powerful gold units available in TGs. Even when I pick Hindustanis (the only S tier civ I ever pick, on occasion), the game plays out as if I was +~100 Elo compared to the mid-tier civs I normally go for (Slavs, Japanese, Sicilians). And if I were to pick Gurjaras (never have), it would probably be more like +~200 or more. I’m fine with some civs being strong on some maps, but Gurjaras being almost autopicks on most land maps is indicative of terrible design.

12

I’m going to follow the approach you took in a different thread.

Gurjaras aren’t that OP. If you don’t defend your eco in early game and save your mill, you’ll lose your only bonus. Yes they have great riders and camels but that’s about it. Their infantry is terrible with no blast furnace, no champs and not even pikes. Their range is also quite mediocre and unplayable. They don’t even get CA nor do they have last archer armor. Their siege is also meh, no SO. Also their uu is only average. Compared to units like Leitis, Mangudai or Camel archers, its very weak and fragile.

Once they run out of gold, they have nothing to make. Only hussars, that too without blast furnace. The only way they win is if they can somehow make their Shrivamsha/Camel play work. Otherwise they have nothing going for them.

(For others, I’m just being sarcastic and mimicking him arguing similarly about Franks being normal in another thread)

Meta must change. Otherwise the game will go stale like it did in late 2000s with Huns CA.

Very true and its pretty much the same situation for Franks, Mayans, Britons at mid elos and Chinese at higher elos.

3 Likes
13

Thank you so much to point this out. I really like the idea that Green4uu ignore the general picture and keep focusing on very specially case and insulting other people

1 Like
14

Why would they need that? They have Chackrams (Which is true that they aren’t amazing, but they do their job well if defended by riders or camels) against inf so no need for champs and literally the best camels so their lack of pikes is irrelevant unless gold has run out (which almost never happens in open maps)

Their range is also quite mediocre and unplayable

Their siege is also meh

They don’t need those, they have a decent answer to everything in their stables and castle:
-Shrivampshas against ranged units and siege
-Camels against mounted units and siege
-Chackrams against infantry
None of them are that weak against monks
For buildings they have the cheapest siege elephants and obviously trebs

The first two share the exact same techs and building so it’s easy to switch, Chackrams are a bit harder, but not terribly so

All of that in addition to an amazing eco bonus and 2 forage bushes that help minimize idle vill time… The civ is definitely overpowered

1 Like
15

their UU is most definitely not average, it’s bonkers I perhaps underplayed it a bit but it’s an S-tier unit according to Hera’s tier list, I know that it does well vs anything except Archer-line but I thought for a long time that Archers would beat it, as it stands, Archers sort of beat it, if you spread them out and the Chakrams aren’t micro’d back to a Castle. It’s possible to lose a whole army of Crossbows in seconds if you don’t pay attention. They are also very cheap unlike Mangudai etc.

Franks and Gurjaras are not even remotely comparable. Like for example, why do Gurjaras get Handcannoneer? Can’t they have ONE weakness to full infantry which should be hard for them to counter?

Anyway I think compared to Franks, Gurjaras are more broken because it’s a mix of them being overtuned eco- and tech tree-wise, and their transitions requiring no effort at all. See Knights, do Camel. Now he is on Crossbow? Easy Shrivamsha, from same building and doesn’t require upgrades, either. The fact that their transitions are easy compared to say, Franks where if you want to get off Crossbows, you need +1 armor, +2 armor (very expensive) etc. are part of the reason why Gurjaras are so smooth and always ready to counter what they see.

16

While i do agree that Franks are a very strong civ, i think It’s more of a matter of how Easy they are to play, but they are not OP. They have a clear Windows when they are stong (early game) but that windom fades as the game goes on, and in late game they are pretty bad. Even pros consider them solid and good but not OP, and i see civs like cumans or others picked and used more often than Franks in High level. They could use a minor nerf i agree but i would not consider them as OP as britons for example. Let alone gurjaras

On the other hand, gurjaras simply have no weakness atm with bonkers counter to everything and a very strong UU and shrivamsha rider OP. They are like hindustanis, which are also OP, but better. With the difference being that hindustanis are getting nerfs while gurjaras are getting tweaks at best

1 Like
17

A bit off topic - Does anyone know some active stats site other than Age of Statistics and Aoe Pulse? I think I found another one but can’t remember the site name.

2 Likes
18

With cheap castles, free heavy plow the mid-game is no joke either. So by early game if you mean the first 45-50 mins, then yeah sure. And having weaker skirms and light cav for that stage of the game matters much less on open maps compared to how strong they are until then. This is why civs with a great late game but weaker early game like Vietnamese aren’t considered a strong civilization on open maps. Considering how 75% of the games end before 50 mins, the hypothesis that Franks is not OP because they’re weak in late game is deeply flawed.

The window fades very late and with the exception of a few civs that are equally strong, the rest can’t stay at an equal or nearly equal position for that long.

They play with equally or even stronger civs that they draft like Mayans, Chinese, Hindustanis. And they’re capable of defending really well with those civs to the point where the Frank strength begins to fade.

Early game is generic and actually a bit passive too. Also weak at 1+ hr as they don’t have pikes, blast furnace or last armor on skirms. This never gets realized in practice because the game usually never gets till that point similar to Franks.

The main strength of Gurjaras is the cost effectiveness of their military. Shrivamshas recharging slower than now, and mounted units dealing 10% lower bonus damage is a considerable nerf and is a much better nerf than just removing halbs.

Also Shrivamshas as they’re now are very strong but far far far from OP. The OG Steppe lancers were OP, pre-African Kingdom Imperial Camels were OP, obsidian arrow mayan xbows were OP, Shrivamshas are not.

19

Current Imperial Camel is stronger. 25% attack speed is better than +1 attack and +1/+1 armor. Besides, new Ghulam is better than old Elephant Archer and Hand Cannoneer is also stronger than old (+1 range, faster projectile, higher accuracy, +1/+1 armor).

20

Definitely not. 25% faster attacking camels is good only in a hypothetical pure melee fight. They also had +6 vs buildings. And back then halbs only did 16 bonus damage against Camels. So it was nearly impossible to kill Imperial camels.

They had Arbalests back then, which is a much more powerful option to accompany that old version of Imperial camels.

Anyways I’m not comparing old Indians vs current Hindustanis, with Ghulams they’re probably even better than the OG Indians but rather I was talking about the state of OG Imperial camels. 160 hp, 9+4. 0+4/0+5, +6 vs buildings and -16 against halbs was much more Op compared to 8+4 (25% faster rof), 0+3/0+4, +2 vs buildings and -26 against halbs.

1 Like