Ha…. I posted roughly the same thing elsewhere and also got criticised of being stupid. So nothing new here.
If inca vil rush is not imbalanced, why change it’s design like that to make sure almost every single civ behave and play more or less the same way on feudal? Oh, it’s for competitive scene, and people hate such unfair “advantage” exist before castle age apparently. Sure, Inca has its own diversity after castle by introducing some powerful counter units, but being a meso civ, infantry got overshadowed by cav by a huge margin, except for eagle warrior. Without a bonus to gain some advantage early on, Inca arguably becomes a weaker civ of all three meso. They are not that aggressive as aztecs, and they don’t have an amazing unique unit like mayans. I Don’t know why I pick Inca if I want to play meso civ.
Copy from another thread about the same thing:
I dont blame this [the apparent frustration of getting incarushed] on the players who inca vill/trush. But any game has the aim of giving its players a good experience. So any strategy should give at least as much joy for the one to pull it off as it does frustrate the one on the receiving end. Else its just bad game design. For this reason, Riot never included mana burn in their game: Its a very frustrating mechanic that simply disallows one player from properly playing the game, without even giving the other side the sweet satisfaction of “you have slain an enemy”.
Back to the inca villrush, it seems the devs agreed that this strat frustrates the non-inca player more than it entertains the inca player. Therefor they judged it as toxic and nerfed it severly. I tend to agree, based on the reactions so far: Even most people who hate the nerf admit that it has to be changed, so there seems to be little enjoyment about the strategy.
Well ok.
Then it’s on devs to try to find something else to buff Inca based on what Inca should be. Power spike on castle? A sustained imperial civ until gold runs low? Idk. Whatever it might end up being, I will hold off playing Inca for now.
I think - hope! - they will watch closly how inca games will go from now on and revisit them in the next patch. Sounds stupid, but i imagine it was really hard to actually see the inca potential outside of their villrushs because it just got overshadowed.
1 Like
They’re fairly OK, but not really an option you want to prioritize. Other civs have better late games. People sometimes say “good generalist civ”, but the lack of stables really do hurt it in this aspect.
The civs bonuses are mostly all early game bonuses, with the villager bonus being effectively removed as it was more or less a feudal age bonus. I don’t think the civ will see much play.
2 Likes
Jack of all trades, master of none is my motto 
these ‘pros’ are wjat i consider ‘master of one’.
How ‘pro’ is that, do you think?
Jack of all trades, master of none is my motto 
these ‘pros’ are wjat i consider ‘master of one’.
How ‘pro’ is that, do you think?
The pros are not only the best at meta play, they are also the best at Incan vill rushing, at defending Incan vill rushing, at douching, at Hoang rushing, at Spanish fast imp archer rush, at Turkish castle age skirm aggression, at literally any meta, off-meta, good or bad strategy.
So no, the argument that “pros just only know how to play one strategy and that’s why they hate Inca vill rush” doesn’t make any sense.
1 Like