Best 1v1 Civilizations in AoE2 (2024) 

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.

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.

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.

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!

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

lose*

You already lost by becoming a metaslave

Your a slave?!?

13 11

Blame your inexperience with your civ of choice!

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)

I never noticed that!

Nice Catch!

woot!

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!!

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.

Drawback: you can't wall with houses

I can feel it in my bones. Prepare for the rise of the Goths!

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

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'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.

maybe a bit of both, franks is always decent both early and late, persians too

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.

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

Because the game is actually never played at the x1 "default" speed

idk what that is but arabia is the standard 1v1 map

@@dj_koen1265de_dust2 = Counter Strike