They have very good castle age monk-siege push on Arena. Their siege elephant is the best of the group, honestly the only one that I’d consider making in castle age 1v1.
Well you still don’t go monk rush usually without block printing because your opponent can just get a defensive castle up in which case you’d go fast imp which is pretty underwhelming without that tech. Civs with all castle age monk techs are fine for defending with monks vs yolo UU or siege aggression but not really great for pushing yourself.
What the heck is going on with the Gurjaras?
I can understand that their super camels carry them through 1200-1700 elo but 1700 +?
Have I missed some new super OP strat with them? ^^
But the high winrate on arena for gurjaras makes me kinda suspicious… is there a viper smurf or something?
Meanwhile Poles are Top on basically every graph, too. Seems like finally people start to make more/better use of their insane bonusses.
Confirmed: i like pain and almost all civs that I like are low tier. Fortunately to me, hindustani are playable (until they nerf them lol)
1 Like
That’s why I’m notorious for playing koreans on arabia 
You play koreans in arabia too? We have very similar tastes
1 Like
Another site emerged.
https://agestats.net/
According to this, Bengalis suck even on Arena, while Gurjaras are good but not oppressive. This refers to all ELOs, so account for this obviously.
The map that appears to push Gurjaras win rate on closed maps seems to be Hill Fort for now.
Apparently I’ve slowed 
11
This have a big data size though no elo filters. This is kinda misleading imo.
If you click on civs you can see winrate by Elo. Obviously the higher the ELO the smaller the sample size so the rates are less accurate.
Your site offers way more though. I can’t wait to see the updates!
3 Likes
The civs are new, have units with new mechanics, so people are trying them out. So point 1 is a bit early to call.
For point 2, stop seeing at “all” elo. Check from above 1600 or 1700. Game balance or strength can never be judged by low elo stats. At 1700+, teutons have 1.8-2.0% pick rate across several patches. So it shows how unpopular they are for most non-Arena maps.
Civs like Teutons got such huge buffs because they were terribly weak. They’re still quite weak and one of the least picked civs at higher level.
Exactly true. They’re a super weak civ for open maps 1v1 and TG pocket, and probably mid-tier for semi-closed on 1v1 and open map TG flank. Its just Black forest and maps similar to that where they are decent.
I don’t think people are making a lot of elephants in castle age. I think the best strategy with this civ is to play crossbows into quick imp arbs like Vikings. Or play defensive castle-Ratha raids-boom-Elite Rathas+light cav. Anyway neither of this is optimal for 1v1 open maps and that;s why they’re getting crushed by meta civs.
Maybe they felt it was more peaceful in the forums after Lord of the west but super chaotic during Rise of the Rajas, Forgotten Empires and African Kingdoms 11. Just kidding.
I hope that these 3 civs get good changes in two or three months. At least Bengalis and Dravidians.
1 Like
Didn’t check that. Thanks for the info.
Don’t want to sound like a nationalist. Bengalis need a buff as they are terribly underpowered in 1v1 settings.
Yeah, exactly.
1 Like
The maps where Bengalis have a winrate over 50% are just 2. 11.
Team Islands and Islands.
Their 3rd most highest win rate is already below 50% and it’s Hill Fort. 
And the playrate of those maps is tiny. Probably very skewed data thats not very accurate
1 Like
Which makes the thing even more sad in my opinion.
But for now it’s all we have, then obviously everyone of us makes his/her own considerations.
Just wanted to say I made a conscious decision for my site not to do civ by map win rates, other than Arabia & arena the sample size is just impossibly low to make any meaningful conclusions its why I tried to do the open/closed classification instead as it gives some idea towards map specific win rates without overly comproming the sample size.
I’ve always wanted to do a nomad group but there’s never been enough data for 1v1. I might have a look to see if there is enough to add a teams one though…
6 Likes
Continue doing the way you used to do. Almost 60% open maps are Arabia anyway and rest of the open maps are not dramatically different from Arabia. If open/closed maps gives you more sample size which is a better representation of stats, then go for it.
Tbh something interestimg although expected is that the old Indian civ has went from one of the least picked to one of the most popular civs
Which is weird because Indians already were a top 5 civ before the rework