![]() ![]() ![]() A big issue I have with them is that you basically can’t open so if you want to play into archers in feudal you’re basically forced to drush into 27pop up or go straight archers after 23 pop up (or maybe 22 or 24). I still see Malay as a very high risk → high reward civ. Malay do also have a very wide tech tree, so you can employ pretty much any strategy you want That is also why I said A tier BUT only at high ELO, because their bonus is not easy to make use of, kind of like the Chinese. if you decide to actually age up fast, you need to pressure early (otherwise you’re just putting yourself behind). Now you will have more villagers and more resources. If you are going for slow play, then just age up at the same time you would with any other civ. Strong early game, but awkward transitions needed from mid-game due to their arbs not scaling well into late game I’d bump Vietnamese up to A tier, their options are extremely good against other archer civs, their bonus helps you with scouting the enemy for laming purposes, and the lategame composition of the civ is great, good siege, rattans, eelephants. I would bump Indians down to C tier, great civ in hybrid maps and closed maps, Arabia 1v1 they don’t really shine as much. (easily outpaced by civs with strong early eco) I would bump Italians down to C tier, they are a good civ, but Arabia 1v1 is not a place where they really shine. Good early eco bonuses, but followed up with completely generic units and no long lasting eco bonus. I would move Incas from B to a weak C tier. I would bump Malay from B to A tier, because their faster age up bonus is an absolutely insane bonus, but it’s also one of those bonuses that don’t matter on lower levels due to not having skill to take advantage of it. Burmese are absolute hot garbage, due to even thumbring crossbow being extremely deadly against them. I would definitely swap Burmese into D tier and move Sicilians into C tier. Britons are THE archer civ, eco bonus, best archers in game, easy boom with cheap TC… although on low levels they might be a bit less good depending on micro skills. S tier - Top tier civs, with great eco and/or military options, smooth transitions in every age and very few weaknesses and bad match-ups across the board (Chinese, Mayans, Burgundians, Aztecs, Franks, Vikings).Ī tier - Great civs, with strong eco and/or military, separated by S-tier civs due to few awkward transitions or exploitable weaknesses (Lithuanians, Britons, Huns, Khmer, Malians, Slavs, Tatars, Celts, Mongols).ī tier - Good civs, with few strong power spikes available to somewhat keep up with higher tier civs, but that lack their flexibility/eco/power level or tend to have inconsistent match-ups (Japanese, Ethiopians, Berbers, Bulgarians, Saracens, Byzantines, Magyars, Vietnamese, Incas, Teutons, Italians, Indians, Malay).Ĭ tier - Decent civs, that can be dangerous in the right situations, but tend to be unreliable, to suffer very exploitable weaknesses or simply struggle to keep up with stronger civs (Goths, Persians, Cumans, Koreans, Portuguese, Turks, Burmese, Spanish).ĭ tier - Bad civ(s), that can’t keep up with the meta due to poor eco and military bonus (Sicilians).Īgree with the other poster. Civs are ordered from strongest to weakest inside any tier.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
Details
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |