Don't think so. Last year (or was 2022?) Celts got a targeted nerf in a time when they weren't considered as good as they are now, and back then people speculated that the nerf was because of how dominant Hoang was with that civ.
I find it unlikely that devs would ignore what the best players can do with something, since those are the players who are pushing said thing to its limits. sure, hoang might be the only guy playing celts like this now, but he's the trailblazer and others can learn from him and start putting out winrates like that too.
with the elo that hoang has a 60% winrate isn't all that crazy. remember that the elo system always gives players above average a winrate above 50% and higher elo means higher winrate. 2300 is quite a lot above average.
Romans: You're not Rome, you're just Greece pretending to be. Teutons: Yeah you tell 'em! Romans: Quiet "Mr Holy Roman Empire" you're just Germany pretending.
Is important to point out that AoE2 have very good balance overall. If best civ has 54% winrate this still mean it is almost 50-50, what is goal of balance.
True, and I don't mean to take away from the devs (the current or former ones), but the way aoe2 and its civilizations work make balance quite a lot easier than other games as well. Civilizations are all variations on a theme and bonuses are not crazy. In general the largest difference come from either having or not having some options, but so long as there are different options which are viable on average that is fine.
The guideline for fighting games is something like having a max win rate of 60% against any particular opponent. We aren’t quite there, but considering how much maps and team games change things, AoE2 is in a pretty good spot.
@@Salnax between fighting games and strategy games is a big diff tho I used to be a top 20 player in a fighting game and was able to beat everyone except my friends consistently(training partner are a terrible matchup if they read you) But in rts its more about an adaptive gameplan for the long run, than guessin or being lucky with a gut feeling - i used hyperagression, so mostly guess or luck was the decider
Imagine being so good with a civ and playing it so much that you single-handedly boost their win rate in the top 1% of players by a significant percentage. Hoang has always been and will always be an absolute legend. Celt eat TC indeed.
@@Brunosky_Inc It's beautiful. I love players like Hoang. Players who see the meta and say, "No, I like to play this way." And then they're one of the best in the world, playing the way they like to play.
@@RaynmanPlays You tend to find at least one or two of those in the top ranks of pretty much any game with a competitive scene. Guys who run characters/factions/builds that most people would get dumpstered with, and make it work well enough to win tourneys. They tend to be some of the most fun players to watch in action, because their oddball strats make you look twice.
Impressive job by Hoang. Funny storyline with Hindustanis happening to jump back to #1 just in time for annual review even though they were below average some months ago.
i think because most of infantry civs are inferior compared to the knight civs is what makes hindustanis are better now in the ladder. Romans are the exception as their centurion is not their core unit, but rather should always be in tandem with legions and scorps, all three can complement well with their weaknesses. pretty much the same case for hindustanis (camels -> cavs ; ghulams -> archers)
@@candrarazaka4351 Infantry has been consistently buffed for years, while cavalry has been frequently nerfed. And yet apparently infantry civs are still inferior compared to knight civs. Devs: Why won't you die?!!
@@candrarazaka4351 Infantry has been consistently buffed for years, while cavalry has been frequently nerfed. And yet apparently infantry civs are still inferior compared to knight civs. 😂
@@ArawnOfAnnwnits because infantry has neither the mobility of cav, the skirmishing of range, nor the destructiveness of siege. How can the balance be made narrower?
@@sirjmo Same way it was historically. Infantry held the line i.e. they were tanky. Also they were cheap. They are cheap in AoE 2 as well, but only compared to cav not so much ranged units on foot. They're also not tanky, except for the Teutonic Knight that's not just very slow but also not all that tanky against archers. Consider that one of the most popular infantry units in the game is the Huskarl. It resists archers and isn't extra slow for it. Infantry are more effective in AoE 4 partly cos it has upgrades that make men-at-arms much more resilient. Note that cavalry isn't just more mobile in AoE 2, it's also the tankiest unit class in the game. It isn't just their mobility that put them at the top.
Yes, but mostly for high ELO. I don't think it would change things that much for everyone else (heck even Daut didn't see what is the problem in archer pathing 11)
Its always so amusing seeing ILickToesAtNight's name scrolling past in the patrons list, him actually saying his name a few times in the past caught me off guard so bad
Well over 20 years later, the highest winrate disparity is less than 6%. This game is immaculately balanced, and it's insanely impressive. For reference, League of Legends frequently has 65%+ winrate champions from tiny balance changes, and the devs of that game clearly do not understand balance, or are intentionally making it worse. AoE2 really, REALLY needs to be openly commended for how fantastic the balance is.
part of that is how well the foundation of the game is laid out, part of that is years if not decades of careful / targeted balancing. as for league; there was this old joke that the riot balance team would throw darts at a dartboard to decide who gets buffed and nerfed, but usually its clear cases where champions got buffed/nerfed with spectator engagement or skin sales as their main priority
How about a vid on which civs seem to win mostly in long post IMP games? I thought Teutons would be one with their eco and death ball of Tknights, Rams, Paladins
Post imp means no gold, so no 3 gold composition.. Tknights are unmicroable so unuseable. Rams aren't good when BBC and Trebs exist. Their paladins while good aren't the best. So no teutons wouldn't be very good post Imp
@simhanssens7331 The Tknight is in the ram guarded by Pals. How do you stop that bulldozer? Archers don't harm rams, and any melee other than spears get mopped by Pals, which can die easy if Tknights exit. They only exist in this death ball as ram boosts and immediate defense of ram
@@tankofnova9022 Either halb SO, or you don't. Use mobility to avoid that ball and wreck their eco, ensure they can't produce because rams and TKs are slow and that comp is expensive. Cataphract/halb also say hi. There are options
Many civs are great on other maps 🗺 though, which have been getting more attention (though more eccentric maps are always nice). Also, I think Mongols' late game being surprisingly subpar is probably showing how important Crop Rotation, Two-Man Saw, and Guilds are. And how strong speed nerfs can be.
Off topic here but I think the Roman’s legionnaires charge attack should be them throwing a pila or javelin that would do damage through the armor like in real life Roman legionnaires
My Slav strat tends to be making 10 barracks and having a massive economy, then swarming out Halberdiers with area damage until the enemy runs out of gold, then I start making rams and champions.
No archer civ is really telling something. And I am not sure this is all due to pathing. The increased cost of xbows upgrade in an already-cavalry-dominated scenario was really hard to understand, at least in a 1v1 perspective. As Hera and Viper suggested, a mild decrease (25-50 res in total) should really be done.
I understand this list is for Arabia specifically. One map pool was very open, another was very closed. Sometimes you can have more hybrid or water maps in map pool and sometimes less. What value has this video considering the variety of maps and map pools?
The general value is: It depends Teutons are also massively strong on arena - like all civs above 20 min games can get a good advandatage from less open/closed maps - but all maps ranks it below top 5, cause no real water play If you check those civs, read into them Teutons: Strong vs monks, strong with monks, superior defense techs, superior pala and inf Hybrid may work for early water, wood discount on farm transition can benefit it - but not for late hybrid or full water maps, since you want use less on wood than gold and food for your unit comp Check the other civs to learn more about them tho(but franks are close tbh with main pala focus)
Because most people play Arabia as it is one of the very few maps that is still interesting after being played over and over as it's so varied (That being said win rate =/= viability, high win rate doesn't make Celts good nor lower win rate doesn't make Mayans and Incas top 3 Arabia civs) For different maps different criterias apply
Poles are top 10. People just don't know how to play them Me a poles player I've got a record of 11-0 with poles in the last 11 games I played as them in 1v1 quickmatch
Poles should be in top 10 closed map civs. They used to be number 1 but the hit on Folwark made them fell from the top and unable to compete against late game powerhouse like Turks and Bohemians.
i used to one trick byzantines, although i have started playing slavs recently because byz are a bit one dimensional in a lot of ways and you are constantly on the back foot
I'm not sure if I got what you mean, but looks like you are looking an archer unit that performs well against it's most common counters. So, it's probably Britons since their insane range on longbows with +1 damage compared to Arbs makes usual counters hard to work, you have to run through their rain of arrows for so long before being able to attack and pierce armor becomes less valuable with the +1 damage.
If my playstyle is post-imp boomish - should I go for early on strong civs to counter balance this or embrace it by using more of a scaling civ? around 1100 elo.
Hey Law idk if you are gonna see this but it would be great if you can do an experiment on unit formations and see if there are hidden stats or units behave differently if they are composed of different types.. ect. I think it would be interesting to know more about that. Maybe box formation gives hidden defensive stats, etc..
Suggestion for the graphs of game duration vs win rate. Maybe you could add something to indicate how long games last for a certain civilization too, e.g. by changing the size of the bulbs. This can give a lot more info, like it doesn't really matter if a civ drops off after 45 minutes, if their games hardly go that long.
I will love so much than Huns gain Steppe lancer, but just generic steppe lancer, without elite upgrade. Ok, maybe not generic because of the team bonus...
My question is are steppe lancers any good though? I know when they were introduced they were beasts but it feels like they got nerfed into oblivion and haven't really recovered since.
@@Krbyfan1-Mangudai- Mongol -Mangudai- Steppies are ok (why build -Mangudai- Lancers when can build Mangudai - no counter is in the bar tonight) Tatar and especially Cuman Steppies are garbo though
@@Krbyfan1 Well, if you are Huns, on a teamgame, you will maybe start with 3 steppe lancer for harass the enemi before switch to knight. In 1V1, you can get very fastly your 3-6 steppe lancer too with Huns. Steppe Lancer are very early-castle, like of how powerfull condotierro are for italians on early imp.
@@The-jy3yqi’m currently lancer rushing with tatars and got to a new highest elo of 1674. Tatars lancers are fine, just a little more fragile than mongols but they pack a punch
11:58 1- Hindustanis. Late. Anti meta strat 9:49 2- Huns. Late 9:17 3- Teutons. Late 8:00 4- Romans. All 7:04 5- Franks 6:08 6- Vikings. Late 4:40 7- Mongols. Early 3:23 8- Celts. Early. Also, Hoang is carrying this civ 2:37 9- Slavs. Late 1:00 10- Persians. All
Just lost a game as byzantines to my friend playing Romans, y’all know how traumatic it is to watch fully upgraded cataphracts arbalest and skirmishers get slaughtered by scorpions and legionaries
one man single handedly pushing the stats LMAO
What civ did he carry?
Celts
Is there any better compliment than being called out like that? What an achievement!
@@Glaciatio celts
Hoang is inevitable.
That hoang stat is so funny. I wonder if the devs remove these outliers from pro players when balancing too
Don't think so. Last year (or was 2022?) Celts got a targeted nerf in a time when they weren't considered as good as they are now, and back then people speculated that the nerf was because of how dominant Hoang was with that civ.
I find it unlikely that devs would ignore what the best players can do with something, since those are the players who are pushing said thing to its limits. sure, hoang might be the only guy playing celts like this now, but he's the trailblazer and others can learn from him and start putting out winrates like that too.
with the elo that hoang has a 60% winrate isn't all that crazy. remember that the elo system always gives players above average a winrate above 50% and higher elo means higher winrate. 2300 is quite a lot above average.
Hoang became a trademark... Why should they interrupt this funny phenomenon in the community.
hoang is the single reason the celts militia dark age speed got removed.
This was the first time i'm part of the statistics, currently sitting around 1280~ elo! I'm doing my Part!
Romans, having one of their best matchups being against Byzantines.
Byzantines: Et tu, Brute?!
because they covered each other's back.
Guess the original is always the best
Romans: You're not Rome, you're just Greece pretending to be.
Teutons: Yeah you tell 'em!
Romans: Quiet "Mr Holy Roman Empire" you're just Germany pretending.
Is important to point out that AoE2 have very good balance overall. If best civ has 54% winrate this still mean it is almost 50-50, what is goal of balance.
True, and I don't mean to take away from the devs (the current or former ones), but the way aoe2 and its civilizations work make balance quite a lot easier than other games as well.
Civilizations are all variations on a theme and bonuses are not crazy. In general the largest difference come from either having or not having some options, but so long as there are different options which are viable on average that is fine.
The guideline for fighting games is something like having a max win rate of 60% against any particular opponent. We aren’t quite there, but considering how much maps and team games change things, AoE2 is in a pretty good spot.
@@Salnax between fighting games and strategy games is a big diff tho
I used to be a top 20 player in a fighting game and was able to beat everyone except my friends consistently(training partner are a terrible matchup if they read you)
But in rts its more about an adaptive gameplan for the long run, than guessin or being lucky with a gut feeling - i used hyperagression, so mostly guess or luck was the decider
54% at 1200+. At 1900+, Mongol has 58% winrate. That's 30 to 40% higher relative odds of winning than losing and needs balance
Imagine being so good with a civ and playing it so much that you single-handedly boost their win rate in the top 1% of players by a significant percentage. Hoang has always been and will always be an absolute legend.
Celt eat TC indeed.
And not just that, but achieving it while also fully commiting to playing off-meta in his own little world of hyper agression
@@Brunosky_Inc It's beautiful. I love players like Hoang. Players who see the meta and say, "No, I like to play this way." And then they're one of the best in the world, playing the way they like to play.
Celts had to be nerfed because of his playstyle. It's an incredible flex.
@@sincapinkuzusuhuhuu1278lol why
@@RaynmanPlays You tend to find at least one or two of those in the top ranks of pretty much any game with a competitive scene. Guys who run characters/factions/builds that most people would get dumpstered with, and make it work well enough to win tourneys. They tend to be some of the most fun players to watch in action, because their oddball strats make you look twice.
The good thing about beeing a metaslave is that I now cant blame my civ for loosing my game. Now i lose because of bad ping.
lose*
You already lost by becoming a metaslave
Your a slave?!?
13 11
Blame your inexperience with your civ of choice!
Hi ! Thanks for the video.
6:51 "The Berserk is also a Loki dangerous unit" ... Loki, Viking, gg :D
Impressive job by Hoang.
Funny storyline with Hindustanis happening to jump back to #1 just in time for annual review even though they were below average some months ago.
i think because most of infantry civs are inferior compared to the knight civs is what makes hindustanis are better now in the ladder.
Romans are the exception as their centurion is not their core unit, but rather should always be in tandem with legions and scorps, all three can complement well with their weaknesses. pretty much the same case for hindustanis (camels -> cavs ; ghulams -> archers)
@@candrarazaka4351 Infantry has been consistently buffed for years, while cavalry has been frequently nerfed. And yet apparently infantry civs are still inferior compared to knight civs. Devs: Why won't you die?!!
@@candrarazaka4351 Infantry has been consistently buffed for years, while cavalry has been frequently nerfed. And yet apparently infantry civs are still inferior compared to knight civs. 😂
@@ArawnOfAnnwnits because infantry has neither the mobility of cav, the skirmishing of range, nor the destructiveness of siege.
How can the balance be made narrower?
@@sirjmo Same way it was historically. Infantry held the line i.e. they were tanky. Also they were cheap. They are cheap in AoE 2 as well, but only compared to cav not so much ranged units on foot. They're also not tanky, except for the Teutonic Knight that's not just very slow but also not all that tanky against archers. Consider that one of the most popular infantry units in the game is the Huskarl. It resists archers and isn't extra slow for it. Infantry are more effective in AoE 4 partly cos it has upgrades that make men-at-arms much more resilient. Note that cavalry isn't just more mobile in AoE 2, it's also the tankiest unit class in the game. It isn't just their mobility that put them at the top.
Love that hoang is single handedly contributing to the win rate :D
I have a feeling the new patch with the better Archer pathing will impact these rankings significantly.
Yes, but mostly for high ELO. I don't think it would change things that much for everyone else (heck even Daut didn't see what is the problem in archer pathing 11)
Hindustanis: "You could not live with your own failure. Where did that bring you? Back to me."
Guys hey, law of the spirit here.
Hey Spirit, Guy of the Law here
what
Hey laws, guys of the spirit here
law hey here guys the of spirit
@@CrickettoSantalune
Here Spirit, law of the guys, hey!
6:06 Today I learned that Vikings were introduced in Age of Kings. They didn't appear in any campaign scenario until The Conquerors expansion.
I don't think the Japanese did either
Its always so amusing seeing ILickToesAtNight's name scrolling past in the patrons list, him actually saying his name a few times in the past caught me off guard so bad
I never noticed that!
0:25 that one skirmisher looks like he's on the top of the left scaffolding
Nice Catch!
6th attempt to ask for Spirit of the Law to start civilisation review series for Romae ad Bellum. Thanks for your informative videos :D
Hoang is so goated holy hell imagine singlehandedly pushing a civs winrate
I love the attention to detail. It is so important to note things like sample size and outliers (Hoang), and I just love that you do that
FINALLLY the Celts made it to a win rate list!
As an Aztec fan, this video hurts.
As someone who knows that Goths should be at #1, this video hurts even more.
47,50% and we are getting even lower.
@@ariiseeyes! I was looking for this comment!!
I somehow expected Incas to show up, they have gotten some nice buffs and are real fun both to 1v1 and play on teams nowadays
Regular SOTL videos are great. But this is the year the AOElympics are supposed to take place and I cannot wait for that
woot!
Well over 20 years later, the highest winrate disparity is less than 6%. This game is immaculately balanced, and it's insanely impressive.
For reference, League of Legends frequently has 65%+ winrate champions from tiny balance changes, and the devs of that game clearly do not understand balance, or are intentionally making it worse. AoE2 really, REALLY needs to be openly commended for how fantastic the balance is.
part of that is how well the foundation of the game is laid out, part of that is years if not decades of careful / targeted balancing.
as for league; there was this old joke that the riot balance team would throw darts at a dartboard to decide who gets buffed and nerfed,
but usually its clear cases where champions got buffed/nerfed with spectator engagement or skin sales as their main priority
Ahh the familiar faces of Slavs, Teutons, Huns and Franks are still here.
That's good.
Hoang: Celt eat TC.
SoL: Hoang eat stat.
Amazing video, as always.
I'd love to have a new one 3 months post-pathing fix so we could figure how much it impacted on the civs.
How about a vid on which civs seem to win mostly in long post IMP games? I thought Teutons would be one with their eco and death ball of Tknights, Rams, Paladins
Post imp means no gold, so no 3 gold composition.. Tknights are unmicroable so unuseable. Rams aren't good when BBC and Trebs exist. Their paladins while good aren't the best. So no teutons wouldn't be very good post Imp
@simhanssens7331 The Tknight is in the ram guarded by Pals.
How do you stop that bulldozer? Archers don't harm rams, and any melee other than spears get mopped by Pals, which can die easy if Tknights exit. They only exist in this death ball as ram boosts and immediate defense of ram
@@simhanssens7331when you have no clue about how the game works
@@tankofnova9022 Either halb SO, or you don't. Use mobility to avoid that ball and wreck their eco, ensure they can't produce because rams and TKs are slow and that comp is expensive. Cataphract/halb also say hi. There are options
@@tankofnova9022 Like Jammy said. Halbs in front, Hussar raiding the teutons' eco and some form of siege to flatten the rams.
Many civs are great on other maps 🗺 though, which have been getting more attention (though more eccentric maps are always nice).
Also, I think Mongols' late game being surprisingly subpar is probably showing how important Crop Rotation, Two-Man Saw, and Guilds are.
And how strong speed nerfs can be.
I'd be interested to see similar video of the worst performing civs. Maybe next week?
Celt eat TC
Seeing my bois teutons true love makes me happy!!
Off topic here but I think the Roman’s legionnaires charge attack should be them throwing a pila or javelin that would do damage through the armor like in real life Roman legionnaires
I've always been adamant that never getting housed is the most underrated civ bonus in the game.
Drawback: you can't wall with houses
Ok those red bombard cannons right at the beginning really sold missing those trebs.
Shoutout to Hoang, solo carrying Celts to top 10! 1111
It's great that infantry civs are so viable these days
I can feel it in my bones. Prepare for the rise of the Goths!
Thank you so much for dropping AoE vids right when I'm getting lunch. You a real one for that.
I wonder how these rankings will change as winrates have time to reflect the fixing of archer pathing
My Slav strat tends to be making 10 barracks and having a massive economy, then swarming out Halberdiers with area damage until the enemy runs out of gold, then I start making rams and champions.
i have loved hindustanis from the start despite being a knight fan and the ending was a surprise.. i didn't think they were top civ rn
That last Persian bonus was removed so fast I low key forgot it was even a thing for a while
Where do you download this data? Is there historical data available too or is it just you archiving it? Amazing work
Hey Spirit! What do you use for crunching the data? Xcel/Google sheets or a dedicated stats software?
I think you should relabel the y axis of the win percentage vs time to win probability. That way is less misleading
Hi guys Spirit of the law here and today we are going to take care of the homless issue
So what you're saying is, Hoang is the Spiders Georg of AOE2?
thanks for this awesome informative video bro
Woot woot SoL spreadsheet presentation yay!
Ty
Cool to see so many AoK civs in the top 10 for 1v1.
No archer civ is really telling something. And I am not sure this is all due to pathing. The increased cost of xbows upgrade in an already-cavalry-dominated scenario was really hard to understand, at least in a 1v1 perspective. As Hera and Viper suggested, a mild decrease (25-50 res in total) should really be done.
Hm. What about a video showing the top X land/water/ maps for 1v1/team games and explaining why they are good?
Hey Sotl, any chance to get a Hussite Wagon vs Organ Gun in depth comparison?
I understand this list is for Arabia specifically.
One map pool was very open, another was very closed. Sometimes you can have more hybrid or water maps in map pool and sometimes less.
What value has this video considering the variety of maps and map pools?
The general value is: It depends
Teutons are also massively strong on arena - like all civs above 20 min games can get a good advandatage from less open/closed maps - but all maps ranks it below top 5, cause no real water play
If you check those civs, read into them
Teutons: Strong vs monks, strong with monks, superior defense techs, superior pala and inf
Hybrid may work for early water, wood discount on farm transition can benefit it - but not for late hybrid or full water maps, since you want use less on wood than gold and food for your unit comp
Check the other civs to learn more about them tho(but franks are close tbh with main pala focus)
Because most people play Arabia as it is one of the very few maps that is still interesting after being played over and over as it's so varied (That being said win rate =/= viability, high win rate doesn't make Celts good nor lower win rate doesn't make Mayans and Incas top 3 Arabia civs)
For different maps different criterias apply
I want to see the video that puts my beloved Poles in any kind of Top 10 list. Even if it's a "Top 10 Worst Civs" list. 🤣
Nahhh Poles are always caught in the middle
* looks at Saracens *
just as the way you've always been
Poles are top 10. People just don't know how to play them
Me a poles player I've got a record of 11-0 with poles in the last 11 games I played as them in 1v1 quickmatch
@@youcanthandlethetruth5433 I mean, I'd agree with you. But I'm a lowly ~700 ELO player. So my opinion is barely worth the electrons on the screen.
Top 10 medium civs. Honorable mention goes to the Poles who are just above the middle 10 civs.
Poles should be in top 10 closed map civs. They used to be number 1 but the hit on Folwark made them fell from the top and unable to compete against late game powerhouse like Turks and Bohemians.
0:50 I'm pissed at that knight way more than i should be 11
10: Persians
9: Slavs
8: Celts
7: Mongols
6: Vikings
5: Franks
4: Romans
3: Teutons
2: Huns
1: Hindustanis
Honorable mentions: Bohemians & Turks
Don't care about the winrate, will forever spam Byzantines.
i used to one trick byzantines, although i have started playing slavs recently because byz are a bit one dimensional in a lot of ways and you are constantly on the back foot
Yet another masterpiece video by sotl.
WE WINNING 1V1 WITH THIS ONE 🗣🗣🗣🗣🗣🗣🗣💪💪💪💪💪
Video suggestion for april 1st.
Who has the best anti-anti-archer-archer ?
I'm not sure if I got what you mean, but looks like you are looking an archer unit that performs well against it's most common counters. So, it's probably Britons since their insane range on longbows with +1 damage compared to Arbs makes usual counters hard to work, you have to run through their rain of arrows for so long before being able to attack and pierce armor becomes less valuable with the +1 damage.
@@PoliWarder Good call.
It was mainly a joke on previous SotL videos, like the vietnamese and the chu-ko-nu.
I wonder how some civs without relevant eco bonuses would fare if they would get some.
If my playstyle is post-imp boomish - should I go for early on strong civs to counter balance this or embrace it by using more of a scaling civ? around 1100 elo.
maybe a bit of both, franks is always decent both early and late, persians too
If he does another squarespace website it should be a shellfish distribution company.
Spirit of the Claw
what sites do you use to get your data?
Vikings good win% and with archers.... I still want thumbring back -_-
Hey law, Spirit of the guys here
great vedio! thx
Great video but I’ll stick with my Mayans always
Hoang is insane
Hey Law idk if you are gonna see this but it would be great if you can do an experiment on unit formations and see if there are hidden stats or units behave differently if they are composed of different types.. ect. I think it would be interesting to know more about that. Maybe box formation gives hidden defensive stats, etc..
Can we see a worst civilizations for 1v1 please
hey spirit, guys here
Suggestion for the graphs of game duration vs win rate. Maybe you could add something to indicate how long games last for a certain civilization too, e.g. by changing the size of the bulbs. This can give a lot more info, like it doesn't really matter if a civ drops off after 45 minutes, if their games hardly go that long.
Hey Spirit, Guys of the law here 🎉
I will love so much than Huns gain Steppe lancer, but just generic steppe lancer, without elite upgrade. Ok, maybe not generic because of the team bonus...
My question is are steppe lancers any good though?
I know when they were introduced they were beasts but it feels like they got nerfed into oblivion and haven't really recovered since.
@@Krbyfan1-Mangudai- Mongol -Mangudai- Steppies are ok (why build -Mangudai- Lancers when can build Mangudai - no counter is in the bar tonight)
Tatar and especially Cuman Steppies are garbo though
@@Krbyfan1 Well, if you are Huns, on a teamgame, you will maybe start with 3 steppe lancer for harass the enemi before switch to knight. In 1V1, you can get very fastly your 3-6 steppe lancer too with Huns.
Steppe Lancer are very early-castle, like of how powerfull condotierro are for italians on early imp.
@@The-jy3yqi’m currently lancer rushing with tatars and got to a new highest elo of 1674. Tatars lancers are fine, just a little more fragile than mongols but they pack a punch
law here, spirit of the guys hey
i hope we can get a 4v4 version too
Law guys, spirit of the Hey here
Here law, hey guys of the spirit
Surprised to see hindustanis as number 1. They are rarely picked in s tier tournaments.
Spirit Guys, Law of the Hey here
Hey law, guys of the spirit here.
Jusr as before Histustani are top because they are THE antimeta civ.
Plus a strong economy.
So... they are very close to broken.
11:58 1- Hindustanis. Late. Anti meta strat
9:49 2- Huns. Late
9:17 3- Teutons. Late
8:00 4- Romans. All
7:04 5- Franks
6:08 6- Vikings. Late
4:40 7- Mongols. Early
3:23 8- Celts. Early. Also, Hoang is carrying this civ
2:37 9- Slavs. Late
1:00 10- Persians. All
huh, was expecting gurjaras to be here
Hoang has multiple accounts, at least his 'Rin' account also has over 2k games with Celts
Tbh learning that 1200 Elo is the 25th percentile makes me feel a lot better about being 900. I'm glad you mentioned that
Age of the kings and conquerors list
Hoang still at it, absolute madman.
Hey Spirit of the Law, guys here
Does playing time mean ingame? Why ingame time is faster than real life time?
Because the game is actually never played at the x1 "default" speed
Seeing Huns at top 3 makes me happy, it reminds me of the old days of AOK :)
Huns with Steppe Lancers? If only...
Cavalry is good? Man, that's a huge change from previous years.
so is Arabia the de_dust2 of AOE2?
idk what that is but arabia is the standard 1v1 map
@@dj_koen1265de_dust2 = Counter Strike
What is the best native american civ right now?
Let's talk about my precious Sicilians being #5 on the overall!
Just lost a game as byzantines to my friend playing Romans, y’all know how traumatic it is to watch fully upgraded cataphracts arbalest and skirmishers get slaughtered by scorpions and legionaries
Inverse powercreep; old civs are stronger than the newer ones