Vietnamese Players and Tier Lists Versus Win Rate
- This topic has 7 replies, 1 voice, and was last updated 1 year, 11 months ago by
.
-
Posts
-
Examining tier lists of top players, the Vietnamese are placed in the middle of the road or even slightly above average in comparison to Arabia.However, when looking at their win rate, it is only 45% for all ratings (18k games), scoring bottom 6.
This win rate increases to around 48% for 2200-3000 elo, but this is only based on 385 games.
The numbers drop further on the Arena.
Analyzing their tech tree, they can create all generic units aside from Hand Cannoneers and heavy Siege (but they do have access to Bombards).
Additionally, their archers and elephants receive extra stats from their civilization bonuses.
The Rattan archer is also a decent unit.
Their economic bonus is saving wood on economic upgrades and the 150g+150f of Conscription later (Paper Money is not particularly useful).
Overall, the Vietnamese seem to be okay, but why do they not perform as well in practice?
I believe their performance has to do with poor eco, wood saving on upgrades sounds good on paper.
However this means generic dark age and in feudal you save 50 wood on double bit axe.
You also save 75 wood on horse collar but this upgrade gets delayed more often than not.
So compare 50 wood saving to the other archer civs, mayans, Ethiopians, Britons all have much better bonuses.
I believe they have great potential but lack the means to get there in time, especially as the meta is becoming faster.
Probably because even with extra HP on archers and FU knights in castle age they still struggle vs good knight civs that dominate the meta in mid-elo range (although they have great cav archers for that).
Also their eco bonus kicks in in feudal age (and its only 50 wood if you don’t grab horse collar) so they are vurnerable to early aggresion.
Aside from archer civs just doing worse on ladder than in pro play it’s mostly cause they’re economically still too slow, the wood savings just aren’t good enough to get their economy rolling, it only tends to start being noticeable mid-castle age.
Stuff like paper money needs to be addressed but the overall impact on the civs winrate for a tech like that is probably fairly small to begin with unless you massively overbuff it.
A way to buff their economy a bit without overdoing it would be to make economic techs research in half the usual time.
The biggest impact it would have would be wheelbarrow being sped up.
It’s not the fastest civ.
They have good units and good eco from castle age onwards but are probably a bit outpaced by other civs.
Also they aren’t the easiest civ to play and winrates tend to favor civs that are easy to play (see chinese mediocre winrate although top civ for instance).
1.
Archer civs in general underperform.
Winrates are dominated by cavalry, camel and to a lesser extent eagle civs.
2.
Their eco bonus is mediocre.
Britons get a bonus worth ~150 wood in dark age and another 275 wood when going for 3 tc.
Ethiopians get 200f 200g by Castle age which is worth ~450 wood.
Vietnamese get ~125 wood saving in feudal (double bit and horsecollar) and another ~225 (bow saw, wheelbarrow, gold mining) by early Castle typically.
Even if you count heavy plow too you are still at 475 wood only by castle while being much less flexible than other eco bonuses.
3.
Their archer bonus is pretty lousy.
Hitpoints on archers doesnt do much and it its only 20%, by comparison bonuses like Britons or Ethiopians much better again.
4.
Their tech tree is solid but other civs have better archers (britons/ethiopians) or better eco bonuses and better tech tree (chinese/italians/portugese/saracens).
5.
Their strength of being an anti-archer archer civ is poorly positioned at ladder where archer civs are uncommon.
Placing above average on a tier list just fundamentally doesn’t mean you’ll have a 50+% win rate, even if the tier list was perfectly accurate.
It means (or I’d hope it would mean) you’re better than 50+% of other civilizations.
You’d expect a 50+% winrate if you play with vietnamese against random enemy civs every game while beating weaker civs and losing to stronger civs, but at many elos players don’t pick random often…
they explicitly pick the strong civs.
So for example on Arena right now you face portuguese all in organ guns a disproportionate amount of the time.
Given that the top tier is being played more frequently, and the bottom tier is played less frequently, a civ which is truly right in the middle of an accurate tier list will end up losing more than 50% of their games (they face top 3 civs all thr time, but rarely get to pad their wins against bottom 3 civs).
The best use for a pro tier list is probably understanding the picks and ban phases in tournaments.
There the question isn’t “can you reliably beat the top 3 civs on a given map?” like it is in ranked, because they might be banned and/or picked for other maps.
So it’s genuinely useful to know what civs are above average compared to most civs, even if they don’t crack top tier.
Brjnging this conversation back to Vietnamese specifically, they do get picked and played in longer series (best of 7 or best of 9), which does indicate to me that after the best of the best are banned away, or if they’re used for other maps, Vietnamese is a very competitive pick.
That’s why they get above average on tier lists.
Their anti-archer answers don’t become good until imperial, and by the time you’ve completed the switch to them, the game’s over.
Rattans should have 5 range from the moment you first begin producing them.
Either the Imperial Skirmisher upgrade should be free, or Viets should have access to Heavy Scorpions, to firmly discourage the enemy from making archers of any kind.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.
