Picked like 5 times now, 2 wins, 3 losses. They might get picked even a couple of more times because in this KOTD draft, 8 civs could get banned. So amongst mid-tier civs Vietnamese could win a few.
1 Like
If you wanna post spoiler, at least mention it is spoiler before posting.
1 Like
Is Hera winning against Barles really a spoiler?
Yes it is.
20 characters.
1 Like
Not the whole set. But now that particular game - Vietnamese vs Mayan is spoiled.
Interesting. In other tournaments, Vietnamese are a “safe-pick” because they arent going to be banned and they are flexible.
In KOTD, I guess they are picked because of the thin woodlines that encourages archer-meta, which in theory is what Vietnamese are good at fighting against.
Which civs did they win against? (tag as spoiler)
There’s so many interesting and close sets in the tournament, this definitely is not.
If you watch on youtube or the vod, the time left is automatically kindof spoiler. None of the games from that series are worth watching.
In KOTD they are picked because its only Arabia, 7 or 8 civs are banned, mostly the best ones and then 12 civs are drafted. So you pretty much go upto the 20th best civ. And Vietnamese are decent against the mid-tier civs.
KOTD 5 Vietnamese winning game spoilers
Nicov as Aztecs vs Vinchester as Vietnamese
Barles as Mayans vs Hera as Vietnamese
1 Like
Paper money is really bad, I like the idea but the number is just wrong. They also get rekted very hard by eagles and Huskarl spam in imp as they pretty much have no answer. The extra HP has minimal effect because their archer still die to 1 shot magonel and Overkill shot from micro battle of archer vs archer. Their bonuses are just not helping much at all.
I hope they get hand cannoneer in the future to fix the issue of fighting eagles and huskarl in imp. Or give them a new tech called “poison arrows” that gives +3 vs infantries for archery range units and rattan archers (replace paper money). Also make their archer move faster (15% maybe) instead of higher hp, higher hp is pretty useless on archer units anyway.
2 Likes
I think extra HP on archer is not enough to call a civ “Archer” civ. Other 2 civs that have extra HP on main unit line - Franks and Vikings, also have an UT for them - Chivalry and Chieftain. Even Portuguese that has extra HP bonus on ship, has an UT for ship to get more armor.
I liked this but +3 for skirmisher is against the balance. Archer and Rattan are good enough.
No. Vietnamese are more than fine and we see them being picked in every tournament and they are doing very well. Even in the ladder they are very good and they have a very flexible play and good bonuses. The civ doesn’t need any kind of buff at all.
1 Like
But they are literally at the bottom 5 win rate…That tells you something. Just because you occasionally see them win here and there doesn’t mean they are doing fine. In fact, as I’m writing this, they literally have the lowest winrate of all, literally at the bottom of the bottom (excluding Roman of course).
2 Likes
Probably it would be enough with moving it to castle age and decrease the price. In Arabia, it wouldn’t make a difference, but it would do in closed maps.
I like it because vietnamese used gunpowder. Hand cannoneers with extra HP is something that turks already have and it is not game breaking, so I wouldn’t mind adding them to it.
Either hand canonner or foot archers anti-infantry could be a good complement for their elephants (to kill halberdiers faster). However, that is a double-gold comp, and so paper money would be helpful (provided they buff the tech).
Extra HP is not useless, it is only useful in certain cases. In feudal age, it is useful at the beginning of feudal rushes. In castle age, to survive a mangonel. In imperial age, when it is impossible to micro. Not a big deal, but not useless.
Lots of people agree with faster archers being a broken bonus. It also would make rattan archer less attractive compared to arbalesters.
1 Like
Winrate not a major or a holy reference. Vietnamese got many buffs in the last pacths, it is enough.
It is better for you to think how to nerf the strong top tier civs instead of thinking to buff a midicore civs. Also there are a priority for other civs to get buffs rather than Vietnamese.
Tell the devs first to nerf Huns, Franks, Berbers, Mesos, Chinese, Lithuans, Burgundians, Hindus, Gurjas, Portuguese and Byzantines then come to talk again.
I didn’t say useless. Either way it is the least important stat for archer. And funny how it is most important for melee units and those 2 civs have more than just HP.
Then what is the reference?
Franks, Berbers, Mesos, Chinese, Lithuans, Burgundians, Hindus, Gurjas, Portuguese and Byzantines are more than fine and we rarely see them being picked in tournament and they are doing very bad. Even in the ladder they are very bad and they have a very one style play and bad bonuses. The civs don’t need any kind of nerf at all.
You see how I can just say the opposite that you said without any further details? Irony is that you denied stats previously and then mentioned ladder to prove your case.
3 Likes
Nice try brother but not the same unfortunately.
These civs that I listed are the most imbalanced civs in the game and the hardest to deal with. Each one of these civs needs at least 2 nerfs to be “good balanced”.
Nice dodging from my question by you as well.
Well this is my opinion, you see them balanced I see them not, thats it.
Honestly I don’t see all of them balanced. I just replied your baseless argument - “Winrate not a major or a holy reference.” I can just copy paste your text to reply that all those civs are fine. For constructive discussion, use some argument that can’t be used against you.
BTW, while I disagree with “Winrate not a major or a holy reference.”, my point is not directly this. You should point out which is “A major or holy reference” if that is not winrate.
This is why I told you your reply is not correct. Actually many of the civs that I listed have even less than 50% winrate and none of them have above 55%, so I applied what I said even on me.
I will answer you. What make it a reference is how much you see these civs have a very wide play and populer picks above any other civs and how much these civs also have a very huge gap and advantages above any other civ.
These civs that I listed, whatever, whenever and wherever you face them, you will always have a hard time to deal with them and mostly the match up will always be unfair considering how many advanatges they have.
These civs have too many too many bonuses and strong points and huge gap between them and any other midicore/Low civ.
All of these civs need literally at least 2 nerfs to be “fair & balanced”.
And this is directly translating to winrate. You just explained exactly what @SMUM15236 was trying to say. And based on that, Vietnamese clearly need a buff. when It comes to game design, buffing needs to come first before nerfing. You can say it’s rule 101 when it comes to game design and aoe2 is no exception as Dev have always been doing the same thing.
3 Likes