[Anonymous Player]

Lately, I had a breakthrough moment where I went on a winning streak of 10 games without any losses against Mongol opponents, who are quite popular at my level of play. This got me thinking about other civilizations that might be challenging for many players but that I have a good understanding of and consistently win against. For instance, my win rates against Khmer and Hindustani civilizations are 73% and 63% respectively.

[KombatDisko]

Mongols are the scourge of my existence, cannae win with them, cannae win against them.

[ArghCaptainJack]

Share your anti-Mongol secrets! Also, do you mind sharing your ELO for context?

[FISO99]

Franks, which is weird because we see weekly petitions to nerf them, but players are normally relying on winning every fight and don’t check upgrades and don’t add monks, besides they seem a bit lost on what to do when you get a camel or cav archer civ.

And it isn’t like it’s super low elo or anything, this applies mostly for mid elo, the rule of thumb is: frank picker, just prepare for scouts into knights. I’m actually more scared when someone gets random franks.

[mariners77]

Franks. 80% win rate (only 20 matches).

At 1000 elo, most Franks players are 100% predictable and collapse from even just a few forward archers and a tower on their gold.

[Fancy-Ambassador7590]

Franks and Hindustanis. 1400-1500 elo. 77% winrate vs Franks on 39 games. 69% vs Hindustanis on 26 games. I almost always play Tatars and go premill Drush (get walls up)-2 range archers- 4 range CA – take map control and raid – shift into a boom or go imp. Hindustanis can be difficult if they go full camel, but if they try and boom I can usually handle the camel numbers easily, get a forward castle and go imp. Tatars just feel like they have all the answers for Franks. Even with paladin you can make heavy camel, then switch back into CA when they add pikes. I usually struggle the most vs Britons (27% winrate on 22 games) but if I can get to imp at a relatively even playing field, and go siege ram, I’m usually fine. Just getting there vs a big ball of xbow plus mangos is difficult.

[readytochat44]

Franks. I would say I win 9 out of 10 games as long as I can kill the first set of scouts.

[Makonnen91]

68% win rate vs Mayans and Britons

I’m a Malian picker so I fare well Vs archer civs . (1100 Elo)

30%- Mongols
40%- Franks
43%-Tatars
44%-Magyars

Im getting absolutely trounced by these civs. 11. I hadn’t realized it’s gotten this bad

[Exe0n]

If anyone is interested you can check your own stats:

[https://www.aoe2insights.com/](https://www.aoe2insights.com/)

I only really play teamgames

Appearently I trash vietnamese, they only have a 35% winrate against me(or my team)

Though top tier civ, Huns have a 40% winrate and burgondians a 43% winrate.

Personally Huns aren’t that great of a team game civ imo, but burgondians is a surprise.

Appearently I struggle against infantry civs, with Slavs, Aztecs, Celts, Incas and Goths being the strongest civs, guess that’s one of the reason I gravitate towards Teutons nowadays

[StRodeNL]

Japanese. For some reason I am pretty good at exploiting their lack of speed.

[NatrixNatrix1]

84% vs Aztecs ,
76% vs Mayans,
68.8% vs Spanish/Mongols (i favourite nomad),
58.8% vs Huns,
50% vs Franks,
34.4% vs Magyars,
20% vs Lithuanians,
0% vs Bulgarians lol

These are all i have over 10 matches against

[da_m_n_aoe]

My third highest winrate is against mayans with about 70% based on over one hundred games. At least half of them I supposed was played on arena though so not really surprise in the end. For some reason some people apparently still think mayans are a good arena civ.

[Author]

Posts