Civs that are better in team than in 1v1?
Civs that are better in team than in 1v1?
I hear a lot on streams that a certain civ is a "good team civ".
Which civs are these?
I am assuming these are the ones that can spam a good unit.
Maybe Brits and Russia?
Which civs are these?
I am assuming these are the ones that can spam a good unit.
Maybe Brits and Russia?
-
- Ninja
- Posts: 13004
- Joined: Apr 28, 2020
Re: Civs that are better in team than in 1v1?
I'm too lazy to list all civs but...
(biggest) Winners of team:
-Russia: map control, can spam only strelet, good lategame, opris are op when map is bigger.
-Ports: slow start is not that big of a deal in team and you can spam only goons later, also good late game.
-Japs: Big map makes shrining safe. Can focus only on yumi or ashi and get sick upgrades.
Losers of team:
-Spain: Paper eco, ff is bad in team (your opponents just rekt the tower and then your push is 2 mins slower)
-Iro: Travois going for one year, bad lategame eco. +25% industrial upgrades.
(biggest) Winners of team:
-Russia: map control, can spam only strelet, good lategame, opris are op when map is bigger.
-Ports: slow start is not that big of a deal in team and you can spam only goons later, also good late game.
-Japs: Big map makes shrining safe. Can focus only on yumi or ashi and get sick upgrades.
Losers of team:
-Spain: Paper eco, ff is bad in team (your opponents just rekt the tower and then your push is 2 mins slower)
-Iro: Travois going for one year, bad lategame eco. +25% industrial upgrades.
- [Armag] diarouga
- Ninja
- Posts: 12710
- Joined: Feb 26, 2015
- ESO: diarouga
- Location: France
Re: Civs that are better in team than in 1v1?
I wouldn't say that Iro is bad in team, skirm ff is still very scary. India and Dutch also get significantly stronger in team.
-
- Musketeer
- Posts: 98
- Joined: Jul 22, 2017
- ESO: 2ndLastKnight
Re: Civs that are better in team than in 1v1?
Otto is trash in team. No eco and very non-mobile units. Better hope you get paired with other rush civs and just go all in, or auto lose.
-
- Ninja
- Posts: 13004
- Joined: Apr 28, 2020
Re: Civs that are better in team than in 1v1?
plot twist: trash in 1v1 too
Re: Civs that are better in team than in 1v1?
india very good in team urumi is very usefull,and china is very strong too
Re: Civs that are better in team than in 1v1?
I always thought dutch was better in team games than 1v1. I dont know how true that is on EP tho
-
- Pro Player
- Posts: 8049
- Joined: May 4, 2015
- ESO: PrinceofBabu
Re: Civs that are better in team than in 1v1?
Dutch are great too
-
- Advanced Player
- Posts: 768
- Joined: Aug 7, 2016
- ESO: miggo1999
- Location: Hannover
Re: Civs that are better in team than in 1v1?
Germany are much worse in Team than in 1v1. Uhlans do quite well early on, but the fact that they can't tank is a huge problem in bigger fights. Also their raiding potential is strongly inhibited as soon as one of the enemies is age 3. They just don't have a powerful unit which they can constantly spam. However they're eco can get really strong lategame, which is why they're not totally crap.
-
- Ninja
- Posts: 14364
- Joined: Mar 26, 2015
Re: Civs that are better in team than in 1v1?
Well scaling civs whose 1v1 weaknesses are mitigated by having teammates perform better in team (by definition).
Russia and Dutch are the first two I think of. Great age 2 light infantry presence offset in 1v1 with having shit anti cav is no longer an issue.
Dutch scale phenomenally well mid game where most team games are won.
Japan's general slow start is offset by just the larger number of units on the field, and of course they scale well.
Ports don't really have a specific weakness that gets offset per se, except that they are designed to scale well and team games are longer than 1v1. Maps are larger and their TCs can cover more resources (I guess).
The only civs bad in team are civs that don't scale (Aztec, Sioux, maybe Iro, Germany for its poor cav, Spain for mediocre eco, etc. - civs who traditionally have strength in 1v1 due to military over eco)
Russia and Dutch are the first two I think of. Great age 2 light infantry presence offset in 1v1 with having shit anti cav is no longer an issue.
Dutch scale phenomenally well mid game where most team games are won.
Japan's general slow start is offset by just the larger number of units on the field, and of course they scale well.
Ports don't really have a specific weakness that gets offset per se, except that they are designed to scale well and team games are longer than 1v1. Maps are larger and their TCs can cover more resources (I guess).
The only civs bad in team are civs that don't scale (Aztec, Sioux, maybe Iro, Germany for its poor cav, Spain for mediocre eco, etc. - civs who traditionally have strength in 1v1 due to military over eco)
Re: Civs that are better in team than in 1v1?
deleted_user wrote:Well scaling civs whose 1v1 weaknesses are mitigated by having teammates do well.
Russia and Dutch are the first two I think of. Great age 2 light infantry presence offset in 1v1 with having shit anti cav is no longer an issue.
Dutch scale phenomenally well mid game where most team games are won.
Japan's general slow start is offset by just the larger number of units on the field, and of course they scale well.
Ports don't really have a specific weakness that gets offset per se, except that they are designed to scale well and team games are longer than 1v1. Maps are larger and their TCs can cover more resources (I guess).
The only civs bad in team are civs that don't scale (Aztec, Sioux, maybe Iro, Germany for its poor cav, Spain for mediocre eco, etc. - civs who traditionally have strength in 1v1 due to military over eco)
Germany for its poor cav? Uhlan are really strong massed
Re: Civs that are better in team than in 1v1?
Uhlans are only strong in the early and mid game. They get outscaled quickly by other cavalry because tankiness is what you want from your cavalry as the armies get larger, especially if the armies consist mostly of ranged units.
- [Armag] diarouga
- Ninja
- Posts: 12710
- Joined: Feb 26, 2015
- ESO: diarouga
- Location: France
Re: Civs that are better in team than in 1v1?
Aztec is good in team.
Although your late game eco is bad, 10wp with team 3v/5v/4v gives you a great eco.
Furthermore, you can get an insane amount of maces in early game (or Pike/mace in 2v2), and middle game isn't an issue (eagles are much better than goons, you can abuse the WC, and 3TC boom with fertility dance is great).
Although your late game eco is bad, 10wp with team 3v/5v/4v gives you a great eco.
Furthermore, you can get an insane amount of maces in early game (or Pike/mace in 2v2), and middle game isn't an issue (eagles are much better than goons, you can abuse the WC, and 3TC boom with fertility dance is great).
-
- Ninja
- Posts: 14364
- Joined: Mar 26, 2015
-
- Pro Player
- Posts: 8049
- Joined: May 4, 2015
- ESO: PrinceofBabu
Re: Civs that are better in team than in 1v1?
Idk they mostly feel shit because of slow age and not real cav, good in 2v2 with a good cav mate though, without a good cav mate/civ they feel horrible
Re: Civs that are better in team than in 1v1?
If you're talking RE patch, all 3 of the Asian civs are busted in team, there are players who abuse this heavily. However, India is definitely the strongest overall, just because Agra Fort into sepoy into Team Urumi is insane.
Re: Civs that are better in team than in 1v1?
I feel like team urumi is a vastly overrated card. It's a good card for sure in terms of resource value but it definitely isn't a large contributor toward what makes India OP in team.
Re: Civs that are better in team than in 1v1?
I thought team urumi was broken because the upgrades duplicate into like 800 hp fortress urumi? On EP this was corrected but on RE i seem to recall team urumi basically being a team mameluke level trump card in 4v4
Re: Civs that are better in team than in 1v1?
Right, I did indeed forget that it does that. 'Tis quite decent then.
Re: Civs that are better in team than in 1v1?
Japan, every other game mode ever
Re: Civs that are better in team than in 1v1?
[Armag] diarouga wrote:Aztec is good in team.
Although your late game eco is bad, 10wp with team 3v/5v/4v gives you a great eco.
Furthermore, you can get an insane amount of maces in early game (or Pike/mace in 2v2), and middle game isn't an issue (eagles are much better than goons, you can abuse the WC, and 3TC boom with fertility dance is great).
i like you.
If you see any mistakes in my grammar/vocabulary or whatever, please correct me. I really appreciate it
Re: Civs that are better in team than in 1v1?
china sending team manchu and team 4 hand mortars is OP in 3v3
generally I think civs with strong long-range units are always better in team, because fights are so big pathing is an issue and that means that hand cav and hand infantry is just super useless, and units that can be constantly attacking because of their range are much more useful. 40 spanish lancers sound great but when they are trying to run through 100+ upgraded skirms Z-attacking all at once, it's just not gonna work out nearly as well as if you had skirms of your own.
generally I think civs with strong long-range units are always better in team, because fights are so big pathing is an issue and that means that hand cav and hand infantry is just super useless, and units that can be constantly attacking because of their range are much more useful. 40 spanish lancers sound great but when they are trying to run through 100+ upgraded skirms Z-attacking all at once, it's just not gonna work out nearly as well as if you had skirms of your own.
- princeofcarthage
- Retired Contributor
- Posts: 8861
- Joined: Aug 28, 2015
- Location: Milky Way!
Re: Civs that are better in team than in 1v1?
Brit, France, Dutch, Ports, China, Japan are generally better in team than 1v1.
Russia, Germany, are almost same level in 1v1 as in team.
Otto, Spain, India, Aztec, Iro, Sioux are generally weaker.
Everything is situational though
Russia, Germany, are almost same level in 1v1 as in team.
Otto, Spain, India, Aztec, Iro, Sioux are generally weaker.
Everything is situational though
Fine line to something great is a strange change.
-
- Pro Player
- Posts: 8049
- Joined: May 4, 2015
- ESO: PrinceofBabu
Re: Civs that are better in team than in 1v1?
I dont see how india is weaker and russia not improving at all, and germany is much weaker too.
Who is online
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 14 guests