For years top aoe2 players are saying Chinese is OP. However it is one of the worst civ at mid to low level. By mid, I mean even at 1800 elo it is still a mediocre civ. At below 1500 elo it is bottom tier. However it is only good for tournaments, only at top 100 players’ hand it is a top civ.
This game of aoe2 should cater towards to majority players rather than competitive tournaments where the same top 10 to 20 people play every time. 99.999% of the player base is not even considered. In tournaments they always have civ bans. Multiple of them. If any civ is considered op players can just ban them. But in every day casual play we don’t get civ bans. In a day to day lobby/ranked game Chinese is just always bottom. And that is for Arabia which is their strength. In closed map like BF or Arena it is a even bigger disaster.
The Chinese nerf will make it even more bottom tier for majority of players and maybe the worst civ next. All these just for tournament players not ban them and ban other op civs like poles or burgundians instead.
2 Likes
ehh doesn’t really make them selfish. They are just sharing their own views. It’s similar to how a new player thinks that goths is op bc they can spam units so fast.
This post would’ve been a lot better if you just didnt throw accusations in the title and write the rest of the post normally.
PS: poles and burgundians arent really op civs. Like they are only really strong in closed maps, only top player who would play those civs in open maps I can think of is Yo. Even in closed maps they arent that strong, with clear contenders in turks and bohemians (who are admittably worst in open maps than the former two)
3 Likes
High elo players do not matter? 
2 Likes
If civs are too dominant in a particular setting that needs to be dealt with. High elo, low elo, doesn’t matter.
Of course it’s ideal if all civs are always playable. But I’d rather they nerf civs that good players need nerfed and also nerf civs that bad player need nerfed.
2 Likes
With all due respect to your opinion,balance ALWAYS should be around the high elo and the top players. Low elo legends won’t bring the civs advantages or even falls since they are doing a lot of mistakes and don’t have that deep knowledge of the game nor the critical thinking.
Balancing around the top players and the high ELO people will bring a better balance to all people and will also bring a fair play. At your ELO stats if we want to take your opinion then we should buff Chinese, Aztecs, Burgundians, and even Britons and Byzantines LOL which doesn’t make any sense.
I really would like to have banned civs draft in the ranked. I really wish that.
1 Like
It is like 2k5 + very limited scope…if it is 1800+ then surely it is a wide audience
1 Like
It is the top player who constantly pushed for Chinese nerf…and then the devs followed them. So they are the reason behind the nerf.
1 Like
there are 40+ civs in the game, i think it’s fine if one of them is less beginner friendly
3 Likes
This nerf is not even enough, Chinese will need more nerfs. They should lose the camel line entirely also.
Even then, again, they do not matter?
1 Like
Btw Chinese is already insane after the 2k elo range - just ask any of the 2k+ players.
And no we dont have bans at ranked either.
2 Likes
It is not just “not beginner friendly”. It is disproportionately weak. Good for 0.0001% of players. Average for 5% of players, bad for 95% of players
It will be a disaster if the balance was around mid or lowe elo players. Look what happend when the devs listened to the low elo legends in this forum when they suggested to buff Vietnamese (which they are already one of the best civs in the game, A tier in Viper’s list). I am pretty sure now Vietnamese will be insanely strong with +100% faster eco techs, the civ didn’t need any buff at all. The devs even buffed both of Byzantines and Britons which both of them top tier in tournaments and A tier in the pros tier list.
IMO, having a banned civs draft for the ranked ladder is now a necessaty considering the amount of civs we have especially the imbalanced ones and with the broken Romans in the way and more civs in the future.
Strong disagree. You should never be able to dictate what civ the opponent is or is not playing. Not in ranked matchmaking, at least, whose primary function is just that: matchmaking. It’s not a tournament.
If the number of civs is considered too high, I would advise to just stop adding more and more and more. Or even remove approximately half of them. Would improve the game dramatically.