Nerfing of Ethiopia is unreasonable!
Does offical nerf Ethiopia by any objective facts?
or just defer to the very subjective ideas of very few players who hates Ethiopia.
Ethiopia have a both bad win rate and pick rate in ALL ranks.
Should a Civ with a full red win rate be nerfed?
abuns were kind of BS with stacked healing and being incredible eco
however, the civ is kind of gimmicky to play and i would have preferred a more in depth approach that maybe trades some abun power or say less strong but Infinite coin mines.
god i hate making 4-7 monasteries over and over and over and over
yes , Ethiopia is a weak but annoying civ. Nerf of abuns is reasonable ,making Ethiopia not so much irritating. But as a full red win rate civ , while abun nerfed, somewhere else of Ethiopia should be buffed to balance the bad win rate.
I mean every one hate african civs. Like most of the euro streamers you know…for the reason i cannot say
QUand je lance une partie escarmouche en choisissant civs random, je préfère encore tomber sur Haoussa que sur Éthiopie à jouer
Just because they are black?
because african… you know t
i from china，so actually i don’t know what euro players think
So many nerfs to a civ that didn’t have a impressive win rate and not used much compared to other civs is crazy to me.
Yes, this is completely unacceptable. Please increase the resources of the Champion Bull to 750. This is an unnecessary weakening, just like reducing the attack power of the German cavalry by 2 points 
Win rates and pick rates don’t fully reflect the strength of a civilization, and there are plenty of examples to prove this. You can criticize the balance adjustments for relying on the opinions of a few top players, but that doesn’t mean their judgment is wrong.
Despite win and pick rates don’t directly fully reflect the strength of a civ, the extreme bad win and pick rate for ethiopia indicate there must be an unbalance.
They mentioned the wrong alliance, the Jesuits alliance is the one that gives you a church, the portuguese gives you an arsenal
what an unreasonable change !
Ethiopia is overrepresented in tournament games on livestock maps, where they have a much better winrate than shown overall on ranked ladder (and according to some statistics, the biggest difference in winrate for ANY civ when on livestock vs. non-livestock maps). Hopefully future patches can address Ethiopia in a way that makes them have a more even playstyle and not wholly dependent on map-based cows or sheep to win.
we need balance rather than unreasonable nerf
yes。。。。。In tournament games,civ is chosed after map, player only chose Ethiopia in livestock maps. But in ranked ladder, player usually play Ethiopia in non-livestock maps. That makes Ethiopia in ladder weaker a lot than in tournament. the strength of Ethiopia in tournament can’t represent Ethiopia in ladders, that’s un fair.
Yes on livestock maps they have a advantage and its because of the Livestock Market and there is no way to balance this for them between a map with and without livestock without making a huge change to the African civilizations involving the Livestock Market which I would be totally opposed to. Some civilizations are extra good on certain type of maps and that is OK what isn’t OK is nerfing a civilization with a low play rate and not so great win rate like what has been done with this patch. This patch for me I personally hate because of some stupid changes like the nerf to Ethiopians among other changes.
I agree. Ethiopia only had a few things going for it. Good gold eco cause of abuns and a strong rush cause of the red sea wagons. Apart from that ethiopia is pretty weak. Paper thin musk unit that costs wood and needs a lot of micro to be effective. In the late game it’s just a very weak unit. Even weaker than ruskets.
I agree with the red sea wagon and abun nerf, but at least compensate and buff them elsewhere then.
That tells us we need to change how Ladder works more than needing to buff Ethiopia. Make the Map visible befor chosing a civ would be a better way to balance many civs.
