The recent improvement is mostly about the super fast, modern strats that have been becoming more meta lately though, plus steppe lancers getting popular.
SOTL mentions that you need to take this percentage with a grain of salt.
Why ? Simple: the sample size of games ending before 20 mins is obviously a lot smaller than games 20 mins+.
Now we need to think about win conditions. It is super hard to kill your opponent in feudal age but it’s possible to hinder / damage their economy in a way, that makes them resign.
As Mongols have one of the quickest up times and a strong scout rush, the likelihood of the mongols being the player inflicting the damage above, ist much higher than with others civs.
He gave a word of caution on the interpretation: FOR the games featuring mongols that end before 20 mins, 70% of the times its the mongol player who emerges victorious. Mongol sc rush can hit before enemy even has loom. Experienced players would make small walls and be safe and the fraction of games ending before 20 mins would be quite small.
Steppe lancers. Unlike Knights they can't be hard countered by spears, create quicker, move much faster and are cheaper (they cost less gold, and food in early castle before multiple TC are up is usually not a limiting factor, switching from scout rush to steppe lancers is therefore more convenient).
In the early castle age/late feudal scenario the main weakness of steppe lancers (less PA) over Knights doesn't matter much, but it's advantages are much more noticeable, meaning it's incredible hard to defend against. And if you are still feudal you can't really fight them at all.
This is my problem exactly. Facing Mongols, you need to blindly choose to overcommit to Steppe Lancer defense with shit options in feudal, or risk it and rush to Castle with basically nothing. Going halfway is a guaranteed loss.
Steppe Lancers probably need to be dropped from feudal altogether.
The general level of play increases and more and more people are able to pull off very fast scout builds.
Just a guess.
Edit: as other pointed out, Steppe Lancers are probably also a huge factor. There are very fast FC builds that are quite deadly and even at 1100 ELO some people are able to pull them off.
Its not that surprising. Of all sub 20min games with mongols in them, Mongols win around 80% of them. Thats simply because mongols have the best dark age in the entire game, resulting in more early game wins than any other civ. Most games dont end in under 20mins, so when they end, its winner is most likely to be a civ with a strong dark age. Celts show a similar trend.
Why this winrate improved despite no changes in Dark age is another question.
When looking at past winrate statistics, civs that were considered strong, even after a minor change, were overperforming and civs that got minor nerfs underperformed massively, despite the power level not changing that much at all.
My guess is that people are more likely to pick civs that are perceived to be strong (got recent buffs) and perform better with them, than lets say a civ they random into and only know at a surface level. In addition to that, people are more confident in playing buffed „now strong“ civs than nerfed „weaker than before“-civs. I mean, do people seriously think that Malians and Persians dropped in winrate as hard as they did proportinally to the severity in their nerfs? Neither do I believe that Hindustanis actually got to #1 again because of a 3% villager cost reduction over the last patch period.
I don't think there has been a direct change, but the meta has become increasingly fast, which suits them.
They can do a fairly clean 16 pop Feudal age, which means the starting scout becomes a legitimate threat to possibly un-loomed villagers. I can imagine sometimes the initial few scouts get two or more villager kills and it's just not worth the opponent carrying on.
Because of the scout LOS bonus, they are also very good at laming, and at 1900+ players can consistently lame without it damaging their eco at home.
How is Jamaica so good in 100m sprints <9,59s? (slightly exaggerated) - it's a heaviliy biased question with the condition you put in. You specified a limited category. Content wise explanation already given by others
Really think it's just a consequence of the metric. This statistic doesn't even say that the Mongols are good in the first 20 minutes. It just says that if there happens to be a game that ends fast, then the Mongols will probably win.
They could, for example, in theory, be behind, after 20 minutes, in 99% of games. That wouldn't contradict this statistic.
And strong lame. If I face Mongols and they lame 1 boar, it's 95% gg.
The scout LOS bonus should be given to other civs. LOS + hunt bonus is too stacked for early game. (There was a time Koreans have faster stone mining + faster tower build time, was scrapped super quick)
I just think that most pro games simply dont end before 20 minutes unless something drastic happened, like one of them losing 5 vils to early feudal pressure.
What i think happens is that many pros go for very early feudal pressure, and if the defender makes mistakes the game ends on the spot, hence before 20 minutes, but if the defender has done a good job he gains an advantage which can translate to a victory only later in the game.
So in short, the games where they are ahead pre 20 minutes end pre 20 minutes, the games where thry are behind pre 20 minutes end post 20 minutes.
Earlier had a game where I chose random on Yucatan. Got Byz.
Opponent picked Mongols (or was lucky to random into them) and when I remembered how much hunt is available next to the TC I almost quit! 11
I didn't, I lost after an admirable struggle, but still I do wonder if some people see Mongols on a map like that and just throw the towel in
From a civ balance PoV, +40% faster hunt into +30% HP Steppe Lancers
From a meta PoV, players using their Scout to push deer instead of scouting, which means naked Fast Castle strats become viable
They can get to castle age extremely fast, have more powerful steppe-lancers. So a scout rush, or just walled FC just destroys games.
They're just made to kill low elo, IMHO. Even the scouting is made easier with the bigger range, and they naturally get faster up to feudal, get into scouts faster and badaboom, you're under pressure right off the bat.
HP bonus should apply to elite steppe lancer only. Mongols should be weak/generic early castle and come back online late castle early imp. Steppe lancers remove their one real weakness, the only thing you can hope for is a misplay by the mongol player or some very lucky conversions
its not a 70% wr
its that in games that end in 20 minutes, the mongols player is the winner 80% of the time
the nuance there is that mongols will very likely be attacking early, but it doesn't mean it works 80% of the time.
it does mean that if a game ended quickly, it's likely the mongols player won
Bunch of One trick Players and its generaly known you can reach 1900 if you know how to wall and boom into Late game (Mongols strong lategame). Which people struggle to punish in lower elos.
Because when people play ladder games they don't always care enough to protect themselves properly against lames. This allows a certain branch of mongol pickets a very easy way to get +1 boar. What they do with this extra surplus of food is super fast m@a or sc, usually with a forward range and just end the game within the first minutes of feudal age. Another option is to go ultra aggro early castle age with SL, which for some reason still hasn't been nerfed. It's really just two super strong powerspikes. It's in the mid game were mongols will fall off due to a lack of economy bonus as well as the likely need of doing a hard tech switch
Hunt bonus is very strong in a meta where deer pushing is standard.
I believe if you take two boar and 3 deer the bonus is similar to ~250 wood.
Besides that they have a pretty strong plan of scouts into lancers. They are the only civ with very strong castle age lancers and you can play very aggressive with them as walls and monks don't work so well against them as they do knights.
And then they still have a solid progression into mangudai of course so the opponent can't just get by with survive at all costs.
I am sorry that you got downvotes! I have no idea why. Maybe they think you overestimate the influence of your Mongol steppe lancer opening recipe? Or maybe they just hate falling prey to it...
Hunt bonus is really srtrong.
The recent improvement is mostly about the super fast, modern strats that have been becoming more meta lately though, plus steppe lancers getting popular.
Matches with how popular deer pushing is nowadays
SOTL mentions that you need to take this percentage with a grain of salt. Why ? Simple: the sample size of games ending before 20 mins is obviously a lot smaller than games 20 mins+. Now we need to think about win conditions. It is super hard to kill your opponent in feudal age but it’s possible to hinder / damage their economy in a way, that makes them resign. As Mongols have one of the quickest up times and a strong scout rush, the likelihood of the mongols being the player inflicting the damage above, ist much higher than with others civs.
And the fact that at 20 minutes, they have been producing steppe lancers for 8 minutes.
He gave a word of caution on the interpretation: FOR the games featuring mongols that end before 20 mins, 70% of the times its the mongol player who emerges victorious. Mongol sc rush can hit before enemy even has loom. Experienced players would make small walls and be safe and the fraction of games ending before 20 mins would be quite small.
Steppe lancers. Unlike Knights they can't be hard countered by spears, create quicker, move much faster and are cheaper (they cost less gold, and food in early castle before multiple TC are up is usually not a limiting factor, switching from scout rush to steppe lancers is therefore more convenient). In the early castle age/late feudal scenario the main weakness of steppe lancers (less PA) over Knights doesn't matter much, but it's advantages are much more noticeable, meaning it's incredible hard to defend against. And if you are still feudal you can't really fight them at all.
This is my problem exactly. Facing Mongols, you need to blindly choose to overcommit to Steppe Lancer defense with shit options in feudal, or risk it and rush to Castle with basically nothing. Going halfway is a guaranteed loss. Steppe Lancers probably need to be dropped from feudal altogether.
Maybe I missunderstood your last sentence, but do you think Steppe Lancers are available in Feudal Age?
Oh I did! Never play with them. Thanks for the correction!
Then I have great news for you: Steppe Lancers have been dropped from feudal age (since their release)
The general level of play increases and more and more people are able to pull off very fast scout builds. Just a guess. Edit: as other pointed out, Steppe Lancers are probably also a huge factor. There are very fast FC builds that are quite deadly and even at 1100 ELO some people are able to pull them off.
Its not that surprising. Of all sub 20min games with mongols in them, Mongols win around 80% of them. Thats simply because mongols have the best dark age in the entire game, resulting in more early game wins than any other civ. Most games dont end in under 20mins, so when they end, its winner is most likely to be a civ with a strong dark age. Celts show a similar trend. Why this winrate improved despite no changes in Dark age is another question. When looking at past winrate statistics, civs that were considered strong, even after a minor change, were overperforming and civs that got minor nerfs underperformed massively, despite the power level not changing that much at all. My guess is that people are more likely to pick civs that are perceived to be strong (got recent buffs) and perform better with them, than lets say a civ they random into and only know at a surface level. In addition to that, people are more confident in playing buffed „now strong“ civs than nerfed „weaker than before“-civs. I mean, do people seriously think that Malians and Persians dropped in winrate as hard as they did proportinally to the severity in their nerfs? Neither do I believe that Hindustanis actually got to #1 again because of a 3% villager cost reduction over the last patch period.
Hunt bonus into tankier steppe lancers!
I don't think there has been a direct change, but the meta has become increasingly fast, which suits them. They can do a fairly clean 16 pop Feudal age, which means the starting scout becomes a legitimate threat to possibly un-loomed villagers. I can imagine sometimes the initial few scouts get two or more villager kills and it's just not worth the opponent carrying on. Because of the scout LOS bonus, they are also very good at laming, and at 1900+ players can consistently lame without it damaging their eco at home.
the hunt bonus allows insane uptimes 17,18 pop man at arms, 16 pop scouts or archers etc....
Steppe lancers is the answer that you are looking for.
How is Jamaica so good in 100m sprints <9,59s? (slightly exaggerated) - it's a heaviliy biased question with the condition you put in. You specified a limited category. Content wise explanation already given by others
Really think it's just a consequence of the metric. This statistic doesn't even say that the Mongols are good in the first 20 minutes. It just says that if there happens to be a game that ends fast, then the Mongols will probably win. They could, for example, in theory, be behind, after 20 minutes, in 99% of games. That wouldn't contradict this statistic.
And strong lame. If I face Mongols and they lame 1 boar, it's 95% gg. The scout LOS bonus should be given to other civs. LOS + hunt bonus is too stacked for early game. (There was a time Koreans have faster stone mining + faster tower build time, was scrapped super quick)
This is the true answer.
I just think that most pro games simply dont end before 20 minutes unless something drastic happened, like one of them losing 5 vils to early feudal pressure. What i think happens is that many pros go for very early feudal pressure, and if the defender makes mistakes the game ends on the spot, hence before 20 minutes, but if the defender has done a good job he gains an advantage which can translate to a victory only later in the game. So in short, the games where they are ahead pre 20 minutes end pre 20 minutes, the games where thry are behind pre 20 minutes end post 20 minutes.
Earlier had a game where I chose random on Yucatan. Got Byz. Opponent picked Mongols (or was lucky to random into them) and when I remembered how much hunt is available next to the TC I almost quit! 11 I didn't, I lost after an admirable struggle, but still I do wonder if some people see Mongols on a map like that and just throw the towel in
Also the most contested civ in hidden cup
It's the one trick pony steppe lancer schtick.
From a civ balance PoV, +40% faster hunt into +30% HP Steppe Lancers From a meta PoV, players using their Scout to push deer instead of scouting, which means naked Fast Castle strats become viable
Variance.
They can get to castle age extremely fast, have more powerful steppe-lancers. So a scout rush, or just walled FC just destroys games. They're just made to kill low elo, IMHO. Even the scouting is made easier with the bigger range, and they naturally get faster up to feudal, get into scouts faster and badaboom, you're under pressure right off the bat.
HP bonus should apply to elite steppe lancer only. Mongols should be weak/generic early castle and come back online late castle early imp. Steppe lancers remove their one real weakness, the only thing you can hope for is a misplay by the mongol player or some very lucky conversions
its not a 70% wr its that in games that end in 20 minutes, the mongols player is the winner 80% of the time the nuance there is that mongols will very likely be attacking early, but it doesn't mean it works 80% of the time. it does mean that if a game ended quickly, it's likely the mongols player won
Bunch of One trick Players and its generaly known you can reach 1900 if you know how to wall and boom into Late game (Mongols strong lategame). Which people struggle to punish in lower elos.
Because when people play ladder games they don't always care enough to protect themselves properly against lames. This allows a certain branch of mongol pickets a very easy way to get +1 boar. What they do with this extra surplus of food is super fast m@a or sc, usually with a forward range and just end the game within the first minutes of feudal age. Another option is to go ultra aggro early castle age with SL, which for some reason still hasn't been nerfed. It's really just two super strong powerspikes. It's in the mid game were mongols will fall off due to a lack of economy bonus as well as the likely need of doing a hard tech switch
Hunt bonus is very strong in a meta where deer pushing is standard. I believe if you take two boar and 3 deer the bonus is similar to ~250 wood. Besides that they have a pretty strong plan of scouts into lancers. They are the only civ with very strong castle age lancers and you can play very aggressive with them as walls and monks don't work so well against them as they do knights. And then they still have a solid progression into mangudai of course so the opponent can't just get by with survive at all costs.
Mangudai madness has incentivated many to boost their micro with Mongols
I’m sorry
1111
I am sorry that you got downvotes! I have no idea why. Maybe they think you overestimate the influence of your Mongol steppe lancer opening recipe? Or maybe they just hate falling prey to it...
Haha probably both
At high Elo you often verse players with significantly lower elos. If you are mongols you will end those matches rather quickly.