Why does almost nobody hate on India?

[Astaroth]

I have been wondering for a long time why almost nobody hates on India. Sure, India is considered pretty strong and their memefire was loathed by many, but aside from tht I feel they rarely get much hate.

That surprises me, especially because many other, in part arguably weaker and imo not lamer civs get loads of disdain, such as China, Japan, Otto, or even (turtle) ports.

Why is it that such civs are considered lame/low/annoying, yet India isnt? Imo India has a lot of really lame and stupid aspects:

- really strong muskets, which encourage no micro z move play
- OP units and ridiculous unit roster in age2 all around, making age2 fighting vs India pointless for most civs
- more OP units (urumi)
- free map control
- really strong age2 rush/contain, meaning you can basically get to at least pr 30 by only doing 1 strat and training 1 unit (basically a much stronger version of the lowbob jan rush)
- free boom without any investment or need to balance eco/army (unlike Japan or brits who have to decide when and where to build houses, India just autobooms with free shipment vills)
- wood vills means less food investment means longer lasting hunts

All these aspects, especially in combination, imo make the whole civ quite lame and annoying to play against. Yet so few people seem to hate them. How come?

Tl;dr: lots of ppl hate on civs like China or Japan who get free shit, OP units and are one dimensional. Yet why is India not hated as much when they have similarly one dimensional strats (agra rush/contain/consulate rush etc), which require zero skill as well? At least Jap/china have to control more than 1 unit and have to survive for a while until they become OP.

[Ashvin]

you know wood gathers 35% slower than food, right?

[Kawapasaka]

I have been wondering for a long time why almost nobody hates on India

They absolutely do. Or at least did. What's trendy to hate changes constantly based on what people are seeing the most in tournaments and on streams, and actually playing against, of course. If playing India has fallen a bit out of fashion, then it gets less attention and less perceived "hate".

[Jesse2112]

lol

[chronique]

I have always said than inda was a broken civ (since 2008) but the india lobby is strong as well (no india not op sowar sux please buf sowar, and please buff my house, make them more sheaper!!!!)

[ShinkuroYukinari]

India takes some getting used to, given how Indian vils cost wood to train, making India's early game much more awkward due to slow gather rate of wood. Civs like Ottoman, Iroquois and France are much more streamlined, so people who spam the same strategy(a.k.a. the infuriating spastics) would rather pick a civ with whom the strategy to be done is easy and intuitive.

[Amsel_]

I wouldn't call India broken or anything like that. It's not like they're unbeatable. They remind me of a stronger France: jack-of-all-trades, good eco, able to rush, FF, or play greedy; though, there are civs which can rush, FF, and boom better than them. They're fairly resilient, and their villagers follow Tabben's workout routine so they can defend quite well. (Sort of like the agra fort) I would prefer an India with cheaper, but weaker units. It's also kind of weird out fluidly they can handle everything. They're not like other civs which have to ask "Do I ship 5 vills or 700 wood first?" India is able to maintain a decent, constantly improving eco while still fielding an army in the early-to-mid colonial age. I know that there are big questions like whether to build the agra or karni mata, but for the most part it seems like India doesn't have to sacrifice one thing for the other as much as other civs do.

But I'm not an expert or anything, so everything I just said could be nonsense.

[Hazza54321]

Yeah im not sure why. Ive never hated on india in my life.

[deleted_user]

Because of nonskilled players e.g kaiser, 2ndlieüetent etc.

[Mr_Bramboy]

I only hate @Challenger_Marco

[deleted_user]

What do you mean? India's design makes perfect sense with lots of weaknesses built in.

[Garja]

What do you mean by people don't hate India? TAD civs are indeed all hated and rightfully so. Not only they're clearly better than other civs but, regardless, their design is completely different and that causes all sort of problems.

[[Armag] diarouga]

What do you mean by people don't hate India? TAD civs are indeed all hated and rightfully so. Not only they're clearly better than other civs but, regardless, their design is completely different and that causes all sort of problems.

"Clearly better than other civs". Sure, sure.

[Garja]

They are, no matter how much you argue for "late age up", "no autoup skirms", "no factories" or other bs, their design give them tons of advantages. They need less resources, all their units are moved uo on the power scale, they have weird unfair unique/random abilities, etc.

[amiggo1999]

Just everything in this post is wrong lol
India has always been among top3 most hated civs. It's just that recently focus has been on china/germany and Iro a lot. Your arguments are just too bad to even consider.

[amiggo1999]

Also Garja, we all know how good your winrate with Japan is (supposed ultimately superior to nilla civs).

[[Armag] diarouga]

They are, no matter how much you argue for "late age up", "no autoup skirms", "no factories" or other bs, their design give them tons of advantages. They need less resources, all their units are moved uo on the power scale, they have weird unfair unique/random abilities, etc.

That's some nice theory but why are Iro and Ger better civs then ?
Also gotta love how your argument is "they have op stuffs and their weaknesses don't matter". If you discard the weaknesses, the civ obviously looks Op. Thanks captain obvious.

[[Armag] diarouga]

Also Garja, we all know how good your winrate with Japan is (supposed ultimately superior to nilla civs).

[gibson]

Rewind a year or so and India was the trendy civ to hate, also like 3 years ago. I’m sure it will cycle through again.

[chronique]

One civ can be broken and not op. Imo the probleme with asian civ is their army strenght progression, and like said garja, they have a ton of small but realy annoying stuff (better age 3 shipement, wonder with hability, shrine that denie your hunting, free op unit from consulat etc...). To me it's more frustrating to play vs asian civ becouse of that.

But who cares, it's like that and we need to deal with that.

[Astaroth]

Yeah, not saying India is the most op civ ever, just seems surprising to me that even eg Ger gets more hate ("moesbar civ") or especially Japan, even without turtling, despite India having a really simple cookie cutter build that is as simple as any ger or chinese FF, with units that are stronger than Japan's (b4 upgrades) and an eco that is almost comparable to boom civs, but w/o needing to invest much into it (unlike Brit/Japan) and still a good chance to win, without any adaptation, at least on the intermediate level.

And even at the very top level the absolutely basic Indian consulate rush is still done with moderate success, despite it arguably just being a really basic HI rush that should stand no chance. Imagine a regular jan rush being a legit strat outside 1-2 specific MUs and essentially as a "hide yo rax" cheese.

[Challenger_Marco]

I only hate @Challenger_Marco

Lame

[fightinfrenchman]

I'm not sure if I've ever seen a thread that was complaining that there isn't enough hate

[dansil92]

India distinctively lacks a mainline cav unit, has no artillery and no way to deal with falconets outside of siege elephants which are very expensive and vulnerable to almost everything. They have their weaknesses, i mean it takes a sowar like 1/2 an hour to kill a heavy cannon, they have to upgradetheir skirns, lots of things. Sepoy are stupid and zambs being colonial is quite silly but its not that broken of a civ

[Aykin Haraka]

is this a racist thread ?