朋友，交流友好一点，尽管贴吧B站长期以来一直有对联通特色不足，低分段胜率较低的批评，但是你认为联通弱确实是没批评到点上。我联通白金局打了一年、征服局也打了一个赛季，我觉得我应该能回答你的问题。
第一，联通胜率在征服者4以上的胜率虽然只有39%，但是这个分段的对局过少普遍被认为没有参考意义，如果把视线放回到征服者以上，联通的胜率又回到了51.7%，这是个相当不错的表现。在顶级玩家内，也普遍认为联通依旧保持可选。至于具体到具体的对抗，战术选择上，恐怕还需要一段时间才能显现出来。而联通的胜率确实是随段位逐渐上升，这代表它确实需要相当长的练习与理解才能掌握。
第二，联通优点在于其战术相当灵活，联通强大的经济能力，使得联通足以应对多种复杂的局势，选择多样的战术，而命官的机制则能让联通的强大经济快速转换为所需方向——面对二本强势的法兰西使用肉马叉将其赶回家，率先上三抢夺圣物将局面拖至四本大后期以强劲的经济实力击溃敌人；对战英格兰、黑衣这样的发育文明又可以早早上三用金马掌握主动权强夺圣物，随后轻易地补上TC全程压制对面；对战神罗之类的直城文明则可以使用肉马骚扰对方的同时背鹿发育以不输对面的速度上三进入圣物争夺战。即使背鹿被削弱，其经济爆发和带来的肉总量收益也依旧相当可观，而不背鹿的对局联通也能保持一个相对健康的经济水平（不像上个版本的英格兰打着打着自己就似了），宋双TC的经济更是极其夸张（尽管这不是一个强势的战术现在）。总的来说，联通并不畸形，而是相当全面。
第三，联通究竟有什么问题，如你所说，朝代过于昂贵，而特殊兵种表现十分糟糕，相当部分的特色难以发挥。在一个正常的对局中，联通在上三早期经历一波经济爆发，用金马控图进行圣物争夺战结束后不得不转攻为守，使用叉弩攻城器的组合保护自己的经济区，将敌人驱逐出去，谷仓的机制使得联通的经济区集中而远离核心变得臃肿而难以保护。通常联通不得不在完成转田之后才上四——这与大多数文明相反，这使得联通会比对方先迎来弱势期，平白多出一个生死难关。几个朝代兵种，诸葛弩在非诸葛弩rush的对局中极难使用，在对抗前排的任务上表现软弱，而火长矛、掷弹兵在当前版本完全没有出场的竞争力，这是非常可惜的。朝代特质由于转田＞上四＞进元的重要性顺序，绝大多数对局玩家都在唐朝和宋朝结束了比赛，而朝代兵种的弱势也削弱了联通皇陵（灵道）的作用，元朝比明朝经济、机动性更强也让明朝除了提供一个掷弹兵和古代科技的加成以外没有任何的留在这里的意义，反明复元成为了联通完全体的代言词。这些问题都是联通客观存在的问题。朱熹很大程度的解决了这些问题，但是其与联通的相似程度过高，使其几乎变成了一个更完善但是更弱（？）的联通。
第四，联通“碎了(is broken)”吗？综上所述，这次的削弱并不会让其失去一切可取之处，联通的问题的客观存在的但也是长期的，开发者的懒惰也是一目了然的。没有等到联通的改动而是得到版本和文明的双重削弱因此感到沮丧是正常的，对降低联通入门门槛和加强特性的诉求对联通玩家是强烈的，但是我们依旧应该保持理性而不是将这种事情上升到国家民族大义层面，更不应该对一切反驳的人诉诸污言秽语，这只让所有参与这次的讨论者尴尬和感到被羞辱。
Friend, let’s keep the discussion friendly. Although Tieba and Bilibili have long criticized the Chinese civ for lacking unique features and having low win rates in lower ranks, saying that “China is weak” doesn’t quite hit the real issues. I’ve played Chinese in Platinum for a full year and also played a season of Conquest, so I think I’m able to answer your question.
First, while China’s win rate is only 39% above Conqueror IV, the sample size at that tier is extremely small and generally considered meaningless. If you look instead at Conqueror and above, China’s win rate goes back to 51.7%, which is actually a solid performance. Among top players, it’s also widely agreed that China is still a viable pick. As for specific matchups and strategic choices, it will take more time for the meta to settle. China’s win rate clearly increases as rank goes up, which means it does require significant practice and understanding to use effectively.
Second, China’s advantage lies in its highly flexible strategies. Its strong economy allows it to handle a wide variety of situations and choose from many game plans. The Officer system enables China to convert economic strength into whatever direction it needs: vs. France’s strong Castle Age timing, China can pressure with Horsemen to push them back; it can rush to Castle Age first, grab relics, drag the game to Imperial, and crush the enemy with superior late-game macro. Against economic civs like England or HRE, China can hit Castle early, use Lancers to take map control and secure relics, then easily add extra TCs to maintain pressure. Against civs like the HRE or other “straight-to-Castle” civs, China can harass with Horsemen while deer-booming to ensure a fast Castle and contest relics effectively.
Even with the deer-nerf, the economic spike and meat yield are still strong. And without deer, China can still maintain a healthy eco (unlike last patch England, which collapsed mid-game). The Song double-TC boom is also extremely powerful (even if it’s no longer a top-tier strategy). Overall, China is not “degenerate”—it’s actually very well-rounded.
Third, what problems does China actually have? As you said, dynasties are too expensive, and the unique units are underwhelming, with many civ-specific features hard to use in real matches. In a normal game, China gets a big eco spike going into early Castle, uses Lancers for map control and relic fights, but then often has to switch from offense to defense, relying on Crossbows + Siege to protect its bloated, centralized eco. The Granary system concentrates China’s farms far from the core, making them bulky and difficult to defend.
China often must finish transitioning to farms before going Imperial—this is the opposite of most civs—causing China to hit its weak phase earlier and face an extra do-or-die moment.
As for dynasty units：Zhuge Nu are difficult to use outside of all-in rushes and perform poorly against frontline units. Fire Lancers and Grenadiers currently have almost no competitive presence, which is a real shame. Because farm transition > Imperial > Yuan in priority, most games end in Tang or Song Dynasty. Weak dynasty units also diminish the value of Spirit Way (Imperial Official Tomb).
Meanwhile, Yuan being economically and mobility-wise superior to Ming means Ming serves no purpose except unlocking Grenadiers and some ancient techs—hence the meme “go Yuan, not Ming” to reach China’s full form.
These are all real, objective issues with China. Zhu Xi fixes many of them, but because it resembles China so closely, it’s basically a more polished yet arguably weaker version of the Chinese civ.
Fourth, is China “broken”?
From all the above, this round of nerfs won’t destroy the civ’s identity. China’s problems are real but long-standing, and the developers’ lack of effort is obvious. Feeling frustrated that China received both global and civ-specific nerfs instead of actual reworks is totally understandable.
The desire to lower China’s skill floor and strengthen its unique features is very strong among its players. But we should still remain rational, instead of escalating this to nationalistic rhetoric. And we definitely shouldn’t resort to insults against anyone who disagrees—this only makes the entire discussion awkward and unpleasant for everyone involved.
China is broke.