Which is the ultimate "not great, not terrible" civ?

[PipesMble]

Have to say haven't watched a lot of 2 pools so far so this is mostly addressed towards people who have followed most of it. Which civ is not picked for either 2 pools the most so far, making them the king of meh.

 

[Tuunbaq]

Vietnamese, Sarrasins ?

 

[Paint]

Saracens Vietnamese are medium I would ad Malians and Turks to this map but they are very map specific.

 

[NachoAoE]

I might be wrong, but Tartars?
I don't recall them being used yet, I might be wrong though!

 

[SouFire]

I mean with 37 civs there are just too many of them that can fill into that category, spanish, saracens, teutons, magyars, goths, slavs, turks, japanese outside 4 lakes, etc, etc.

Aoc and the good old days, only 5 civs stronger than the rest and two bad civs, but with 37 man, even if 10 civs are the strongest, then 27 civs are still below them making them just meh.

 

[Freezing_Point]

I thought the traditional answer to this was Byzantines.

 

[AtTheGates_]

Magyars I would say is the ultimate not great not terrible civ.
But like others has said. There are maaaany civs that fall into that category now.

 

[Chainsaw]

My first thought was vietnamese as well.

 

[SaladEsc]

Malay

 

[Lord_patito]

After all yeah, Malay. Decent on land maps, hybrid maps, water maps, close maps, open maps... They suck on no type of map, neither they shine in any

 

[KolyaKrasotkin]

I don't think, you can take the 2 Pools drafts to answer this, because the "bad pool", imo, is not mainly about "bad civs" but rather about bad synergies.

And you should at least specify the game mode (RM, DM, EW, 1v1, TG, etc.) and map class (open. closed, water, hybrid).

So, as usual, it depends ...

 

[SuperskinnyBLS]

Japanese are top tier.

 

[Paint]

Malay are top 6 on water maps so I would not put them in medium.

 

[The Bloodless]

After all yeah, Malay. Decent on land maps, hybrid maps, water maps, close maps, open maps... They suck on no type of map, neither they shine in any

On arena I'd say they do shine. Maybe a top 5 civ. Also, the same on Islands, archipelago (especially this), and team Islands.

On arabia /similar I agree with you though.

 

[Lord_patito]

On arena I'd say they do shine. Maybe a top 5 civ. Also, the same on Islands, archipelago (especially this), and team Islands.

On arabia /similar I agree with you though.

Maybe on archipiélago, but on island theyare probably the worst of best civs to use. Thusa meh civ

 

[PipesMble]

Ok this was bugging me a bit so I did some research on the group stage civ drafts. It turns out that all 37 civs were featured in the civ drafts and the matchups themselves which is interesting enough on itself. As for the original question there is a five way tie on the civ that was drafted the least. These civs that were drafted 4 times each are Aztecs, Huns, Magyars, Slavs and Tatars. The civ that we have seen played less in all the group stage is Tatars, which featured only in one match.
I will polish the results and post them later but some other interesting facts so far are:
i. Vikings underperforming with only 27% win rate (3 wins in 11 matches)
ii. Chinese dominating with an astounding 77 % win rate (13 wins in 17 matches)
iii. The civ that was "given" the most to the opponent was not Burgundians or Sicilians but Turks (given 17 times)
iv. Vietnamese and Tatars are the only 2 civs without a win in the group stage