I was wondering when the first argument based on what civ wins or lose in RBW3 would pop out, here it is. Funnily enough people still ask for Magyar buffs despite them being the most picked civ in said competition.
1 Like
i mean according to equalizer almost everything is broken.
4 Likes
Bulgarians are #4 winrates in 1v1 all elo and #11 for 1650 elo.
They are clearly not well baalcned and overbuffed currently, especially for lower skill levels.
You guys are terible, you dont even try to discuss the topic objectively and just go for Equalizer938341 personally. Yes he is always ranting but i dont see it as an excuse. Shame on you…
1 Like
winrate is 52.43% overall. which is considered balanced in most games. you nerf it and they become a trash civ again. so no, they are not overbuffed at low levels.
2 Likes
The discount is not that great in practice. Paired with the fact archers are not viable, the castle time advantage is minimal or non existent.
Research times are arguably the biggest bonus. But I think the timing is way more critical for archers than for other units. And, again, archers are a terrible option for bulgarians.
Keep in mind that food is the critical resource here. So these bonuses paired with the lack of xbow look like a pretty good balance imo.
I think complaining about this is like complaining about goths after letting them reach imperial. Bulgarians have more limited options in feudal, and you know it. That’s your advantage, exploit it.
there are much more civs under 50% than above 50%, also there are many around the 45% mark while only franks is that 55% and else mostly at 52%.
This information together indicates that the generall power level of those civs above 52% are very much stronger than those below 50%. Since all winrates re connected (for example extremely buff mayans to 60% and we will see all other civs sinking in return aswell).
1 Like
15 to 20. not that much of a difference. and definitely not “Much more” Despite your obvious exaggeration
else mostly at 52%? false, yet more exaggeration from you. only 6 civs are close to 52% or above (Franks, Celts, Incas, Bulgarians, Huns, and Berbers).
or just that those civs are easier to use. what do you notice about the civs at the top. none of them have to be micro intensive to be effective, which is a boon at lower skills levels.
furthermore if we balance around all skill level players tell me why chinese haven’t been buffed despite the fact that they routinely have low winrates at lower play levels?
clearly that isn’t the case, so cherry picking all players winrates means NOTHING.
heck if we balanced around all skill levels we’d have to buff pretty much every archer civ.
back to the topic of bulgarians. i guess nobody has lost an empire wars match in wololo 3 with bulgarians. their winrinrates is soo good, they must be slightly nerfed just for this alone.
your argument also goes the other way round, pro players S tier chinese are not getting nerfed becuase they are bad for the average.
ALso you didnt get my point i was trying t make (not very good, my fault)
there are 2 civs above 53% winrate and 8 civs below 47%. That is what i was trying to say. Those 2 civs are masivvely more powerfull than those 8 below to skew the statistics this mmuch. (speaking all elo here)
We should focus on nerfing the top 5 civs more than we should buff the low ones just the get back to an unskewed power level distribution.
1 Like
Ornlu rates them at B tier
As well Hera.
Tatars are clearly very strong now and don’t appear in the top five, still pros think that they would be nerfed and you don’t say nothing.
But Bulgarians appear at the top 5 for several ELO ranges, are getting some victories in a niche tournament and they need to be nerfed? and 52% winrate is balanced, it really means that they are fine now.
aww look at you dodging all those facts you don’t want to discuss.
EW starts in feudal which gives them a bunch of advantages. also they have been played 3 times so far. not that much.
should we nerf magyars too based on your logic?
they’ve been nerfed in the past year alone already.
that doesn’t mean much because there is more then 10 civs.
and again, all elo doesn’t mean anything. or should we buff archer civs by your logic?
so prepare for a bunch of archer buffs by your logic, despite the fact that archer civs are great at the top level.
and for all you know chinese might get nerfed again. but there have been other civs that required nerfing more then them.
funny seeing as you literally said this earlier
plenty of people tried to talk objectively with him, he just ignored it.
you literally said were all being terrible because we weren’t objective but you ignore all the Objective discussion that he has legitimately ignored and then call US TERRIBLE.
so who is the one who isn’t being friendly? seems like you started the mud slinging. here let me show you some objective discussion.
3 Likes
mud slinging… yeah i just did that and delted it as i was ahsamed of myself lashing out
1 Like