Updated civ stats from reddit user


He did it again.
I love his explanations and way of handling winrates according to elo difference.

Found in this thread


I am a Mongols lover.

It’s funny that people here keep saying its super op but in fact the win rate is just around 50%.

Mongols have very strong post imp, that’s why.

very strong post imp? are you serious? Late castle to post imp is actually the hardest part for Mongols.

1 Like

he means the moment in which your mass of mangudai start to push. In that moment mongols are OP, lol.
It is in late imperial more than post imp, in my opinion.

Yes, if Mongols can survive in late and have the numbers of the Mangudai, it’s kind of OP.
But it’s really not easy to be happened in 1v1 Arabia.

Maybe people keep repeating they are OP because they lose against them sometimes and their memory is biased.

However, rants about other civs may be justifiead (franks, cough, cough)


The dude you try to Talk all only plays is ff and DM, where in both cases the fights go far to post imperial and tends to face a lot of strong units (Boyars, Teutonic Paladin, Leitis, Konnik, Mangudai) as Portuguese, just to inform from what perspective he talks.

The dude, that was attempted to communicate with, would like to speak for himself. Thx. Not the first time you do this. Rude and berating.

You talk as if it was a crime to play ffa and got forbid not rm Arabia…

Edit. Argh this is getting me mad the more I think about it. So not worth it.

You seem to hold a grudge against me personally, for outspokently supporting the lith paladin nerf and proposing blast furnace removal more than a year before dawn of the dukes was even announced.


It’s obviously not. But the game isn’t really designed to br balanced around ffa and dm style games.

Still not justifies the above.

Was just offering an explanation that Mongols got a strong lategame into the void without any settings mentioned to the dude that said people commonly claim Mongols are op

and furtherlime felt the need to clarify to the above dude something along the line of “you do now, that you are trying to talk to a retard” (not his words but what he meant)

Obviously I am offended.

What has any of this to do with ffa, dm, or any other setting is beyond me.

1 Like

if you feel offended that easily, trust me, many of the users here could offend you more than this.

I ignored it a few times, but he has done this already more than once. (with “this” I mean degrading and targeting me directly). If I am not to be offended by that, than this place has become too hostile for me to hang out.

Anyway, sry for derailing the topic.

On the topic, there is a very long and zpvoted comment on the reddit post about nerfing Frank’s, teutons, Berber mayans.anybody read that?

Is it finally time for the long awaited teuron over buff revert? The sign are slowly appearing.

1 Like

Why you try to put words that haven’t anything to do with what I said?
I just that, from your perspective of what you play is that you see soemthing that are OP when those aren’t lol, just like the guy who complained that Onagers and Scorpions are OP, when the games that played were all at 300 pop treaty BF, so obviously you can expect that kind of results, but that doesn’t mean that need balance becauese of don’t knowing what to deal with that.

Open maps

Closed maps

Not sure about this Naive calculation but overall the Win Rates distributions seem pretty good these days


Tatars sucking at Arena and Bohemians close to 60% 11

Sure, but if you check them in open maps it is a different story
I will focus in the map and civ pick now more than balance

I was more surprised about poles performance in closed maps.

The naive win rate ONLY takes into account the elo differences within match, so it is like if both players had the same elo. Besides, it is pretty much similar to the raw winrate. There is another winrate stats (Averaged winrates) that averages the winrates against each other civ, so the effect of meta civs doesn’t impact the results. After this, franks and mayans still are the best, but their dominance is smoothed.

Also, another reddit user posted these civ performances.

Franks stands up the best ones in both reddit threads.


@MatCauthon3 Source

We see gunpowder civs and Gunpowder UU’s (as well as too strong UU’s) on the absolute Top.

And don’t say now “well turks needed a buff on arabia”, yeah sure. But you can always scoop away a little imperial power and shift it to feudal. Restoring Watch Towers to AoC balance allows Turks to survive Feudal better or keep the extra pierce armor and remove the cheaper gunpowder techs for example. If a civs strength is solely dependent on whether it survives past Feudal or Castle, or if it has enough unique units (Spanish, Koreans, Vietnamese), then this is a bad civ by design.

And how Mayans, Franks, Britons and Ethiopians are still not (slightly) nerfed is beyond me. And this type a prober nerf not such baby steps, like last frank nerf

1 Like

That chart is from closed maps

There, gunpowder civs (or civs woth strong imperial units) have already been good. And this is good because some of these civs are very bad in arabia. However, teutons are good in both, although not top 5

You can find the data from open maps here.

1 Like