Everyday I see another person posting a new balance changes discussion about what he/she would change about certain civs.
I think the much more important discussion is what Civs actually need some changes to be balanced.
I therefore had a look at the following:
- 1v1 Tournament performance since KOTD3 (given consideration to the patch changes since then).
- pro Feedback (for example Hera’s Arabia and overall tierlist…)
- winrates (according to the performance statistics published on Reddit)
I agree with the Devs that while not every civ needs to be great on Arabia, they should at least fall into the 45%-55% winrate spectrum.
So let’s have a look:
OP Civs in Pro Matches:
Since Aztecs, Mayans, Franks and Tatars got nerfed many Pros consider Chinese to be the best 1v1 Arabia civ in the game. Hera also considered Chinese to be one of the very best civs overall. If the Devs want to nerf a civ because of its performance in Pro games Chinese should probably be worth taking a look at.
OP Civs in ranked matches:
While they are only considered good but not top 3 in pro games they are the only civ in 1v1 ranked Arabia games that manages to scratch or even brake the 55% winrate threshold.
With a clear gameplan, strong options and little power spikes in all ages they currently dominate their matches even though the opponents always know what their dealing with…
Other then in those 2 instances there isn’t really any other Civ that could be considered “OP” at this point. (Though there are plenty of other very strong options).
Underperforming civs can be grouped together:
Burgundians and Sicilians:
Both new civs clearly need some major changes as their low winrate and low opinion of pro players indicate.
Malay, Portuguese and Italiens:
All three civs are great on hybrid maps, closed maps and island maps. The only weakspot they have is open land maps such as Arabia with a winrate ranging from 42% to 44%.
While those civs certainly don’t need any change that buffs them overall a small tweak that helps these civs specifically on open land maps would be beneficial. The goal is not to make them great on Arabia as they already shine in other scenarios but perhaps buff them enough to get to a 45% to 47% winrate…
Cumans, Burmese and Spanish:
While the winrates of these three civs are not as bad as the ones mentioned before they are described as lackluster by pros and underperform in ranked matches.
All 3 civs have in common that they are heavily dependent on their castle age unique unit which is basically some kind of “cav archer”.
Both the cavalry archer and early unique unit playstyle are not favoured in DE, therefore these civs are bound to struggle…
Since their archer bonus got nerfed people seem to be confused what to do with them resulting in a low 44% winrate. Is it an archer civ? Is it a camel civ? Is it a monk civ? A siege civ? Techtree says it’s a naval civ… While they have many options in their techtree (like Chinese) they don’t have any eco bonus to back them up (unlike Chinese).
Of course some tweaks to other civs to make them more interesting or enable them to use different unit types are always welcome. Balancing for other map types and teamgames should also always be considered. However, I agree with the Devs that the civ balance for the most played map should have the highest priority.