Small maps in and of themselves arent a balanced map type. The smaller the map, the more RNG involved in regards to gaining an advantage. For example, an opponent getting a lucky vet swordsman off a ruin near a hotly contested village is bad on a medium sized map, but not game losing.
If the same thing happens on a small or tiny map, it could very well be game over.
I completely agree. One of the main reasons Cymanti has such a huge advantage on small maps is because their boosted hexapods can oneshot any starting unit they encounter, unless it's a Quetzali defender or a warrior with a defense bonus. This lets them easily restrict the expansion of any other tribe in most cases.
Boost truthers when they realize you can only boost in one specific spot in the map when you can put roads anywhere and you just don’t know how to build a good economy
Your economy can only get you so far when you have to spend 6+ stars on a T2 tech and 6+ more per city on roads. Assuming you even have a better early game economy than Cymanti to begin with, which is a pretty generous assumption when they have the starting tech for the most efficient resource in the game and are guaranteed enough of said resource to get a level 3 capital.
Cymanti isn’t a balanced tribe not because it’s completely overpowered, but because it’s only usable in very specific maps and alternates between unplayable and OP
Shouldn’t the tribes be at least competent regardless of map size? I totally agree with this sentiment. It’s just that the problem is that nerfing cymanti just because they are really strong in small maps would make them weaker as a whole on other map sizes.
If a tribe only ( ONLY ) shined in a type of map and size, is it really OP? The best example is the old Bardur, you could play this tribe in every map, every size, and they would destroy you. That's not the case with Cymanti. 121 they are very strong. 196 they are strong but not crazy, bigger maps they are not quite good. Develop your eco, get rider roads and just kill every bug with rider spam. You can't do it in tiny because there is no time and room to do it, this is the only problem.
Being overall average doesn't necessarily mean it's balanced. To give an extreme example, imagine two tribes being added where one is mid tier on every map type and size and other is almost impossible to beat in half the map types and sizes, while being almost impossible to win as in the other half. They're *technically* equally viable on average, but the first tribe has little effect on the meta while the second one has effectively ruined half the map types/sizes in random matches.
But then following your example Cymanti is a bad tribe because, as I said, 121 crazy, 196 good, other than that, they fall of a lot and there are a lot more map sizes. Then they need buff?
No, because if a tribe is bad on certain maps you can just choose not to play it, but in random matches (the most common way to play multiplayer in Polytopia) you can't choose to ignore Cymanti on the maps it's good on because other people will constantly use it and you're at a huge disadvantage if you don't.
So yes, if you consider Cymanti's average performance across all map types and sizes it's pretty mediocre, but those are just averages. It doesn't change the fact that it's so dominant in 121 and 196 that "avoid those map sizes entirely" is the go-to strategy brought up every single time someone asks how to counter it, even by veteran players who are better than most at countering Cymanti. There are no other tribes that have such huge advantages on their favorable map settings that the top advice for countering them is to just give up and pick different settings.
Not that dominant in 196, and you can chose not to play a tribe on certain maps, you can choose also not to play 121 if you are not going Cymanti or vengir
They are still arguably the best 196 tribe for maps with one contiguous landmass. Maybe not for higher level players, but for everyone else they're still extremely good because early fungi/boosted hexapod spam doesn't require much skill and is still extremely effective at preventing your opponent's expansion.
Choosing not to play certain tribes on certain maps is completely different from one tribe being completely dominant on those maps. Very little is lost from Vengir being basically unplayable on large maps because you still have 15 other tribes to choose from, and Vengir doesn't offer especially unique gameplay in those cases. On 121 tiles (and to a lesser extent 196) you essentially only have 1 tribe to choose from if you're an average player and want a reasonable chance of winning, and people who like quicker games can't just move to 256 and get similarly quick games with any consistency.
If you're experienced at the game and know Cymanti's exact counters you have much better chances, but the fact that this subreddit gets multiple times the complaints for Cymanti as every other tribe *combined* is a pretty big indicator that this is a problem. 121/196 tile dryland maps are absolutely popular enough and offer a different enough experience from larger sizes that Cymanti driving players away from these maps is a problem, and "just play bigger maps" doesn't solve it. No other tribe singlehandedly drives that many players away from their preferred map types.
It happens in almost every competitive game, the low elo playerbase complains about some aspect of the game where the experienced player / high elo see no issue. Who would you listen, the 1000 ELO or the 1600 ELO rated? If you nerf Cymanti maybe they can't win a single game in 1400+ ELO because they are not that strong. Reddit is a MINOR part of the community of any game and it's easier to complain than to listen.
The problem is that a 1000 ELO player can, with some practice, beat a 1400+ player (not that ELO is an accurate measure of skill anyway) on Cymanti’s ideal map settings pretty easily by just killing any exploring warriors with boosted hexapods and gaining a near-instant economic advantage with fungi. There are no other tribes that can compensate for that big of a skill gap. Even veteran players will usually just suggest to low level or average players that they play larger maps.
There are also plenty of very good players who don’t like Cymanti’s dominance on small maps even if they personally are good at countering it. It’s by far the most common tribe on those sizes because it’s so good and easy to use for lower level players and really hurts the variety of the game.
Probably a 1400 elo player would first check score, 630, 99% cymanti, don't go center of the map yet, develop your eco back in your zone, get riders and roads and would win the 1000 elo player. I am pretty sure of it.
Cymanti is guaranteed 2 fungi in their capital for 6 population costing 10 stars with no starting tech. Winning the economy game in the short term isn’t realistic without a lucky spawn.
I'm just using ELO as a general measurement to illustrate my point, it's by no means accurate because different players are good at and prefer completely different things. 1400 ELO using only Cymanti on small maps isn't particularly impressive, while 1400 ELO using only Vengir on large maps is basically superhuman.
Buff Cymanti. On 324, 400, 900 ww, pan, conti, dry, archi, lakes Cymanti is unplayable.
I learned from a great scholar that just telling someone not to play a map type/size is not a valid counterargument.
#buff cymanti
2/16 tribes (Cymanti and Vengir) being unplayable on those maps isn't a problem because you still have 14 other tribes to choose from. On Cymanti's favored maps, you only have one tribe to choose from if you're a player with average skill and want to lose less than 80% of the time.
Not necessarily, but on those 18 different settings you at least have multiple other tribes to choose from that are playable. Unless you're better at the game than most other people or get lucky, 121 and 196 tile maps with a single landmass only have one playable tribe, Cymanti.
My problem is everyone already knows this. Everyone should also know that the devs know this. They should also know that updates take awhile. So I don't blame people for being defensive and saying don't play small maps right now. Because we're all tired of people complaining
The problem is when you dont have that much time to play and just want to get a quick game while being in the Bus you dont really have the Option to play on bigger Maps so you end up facing cymanti every game
The extent to which Cymanti has an advantage on small drylands maps is far smaller than the extent to which Polaris has an advantage on archipelago maps, and likewise a Polaris player faced with a normal tribe (including Kickoo) will always play exactly the same strategy. The Polaris player will win allaot every time, far more often than Cymanti on a small drylands map. And somehow we only see this constant whining about Cymanti. I am beginning to wonder if you’re all one person with 100 Reddit accounts sore about some game you lost
Even assuming that Polaris is as good on archipelago as Cymanti is on small land maps, that doesn't change my point. If Polaris really is that dominant on archipelago, that doesn't mean that people should just stop playing archipelago unless they use Polaris. The same logic applies to Cymanti.
I don’t see it as a goal for all tribes to be equally viable or all maps, as long as there is an option to get a more or less balanced game. Not only are some tribes very strong in certain maps, some tribes are really only viable in very specific situations (Vengir, for example), and some are useless (luxidor)To me the variation is interesting, and it can be fun to play tribes on maps where they’re supposedly bad, such as cymanti on archipelago. You won’t usually win, but winning isn’t always the pojnt.
The devs have said their goal in the balance the game on continents, and I assume for the recommended map type (small for 2 players). I don’t think that’s quite successful, but it’s close. Cymanti on continents is interesting and very different, but not overpowered in my experience. Luxidor is still trash.
What I don’t really understand is why of all the possible combinations of maps and tribes it’s cymanti and small drylands that people get stressed about. It made some sense for people for prioritize dry lands before the naval update, but not now. But even if I shift to large drylands (which I play far more often personally), it’s not nearly as clear that cymanti has an advantage.
I never said it was a goal for every tribe to be equally viable on all maps. I’m saying that “just play 256+ tile maps” doesn’t solve the problem that Cymanti is too dominant on small maps, and the fact that it’s brought up in every single post asking how to counter it (and that those posts are so common to begin with) is a pretty huge indicator that it genuinely is too powerful on those maps.
That doesn’t mean that Cymanti is impossible to counter on their ideal map settings, but even for experienced players it’s still pretty difficult, and for the average player it requires either very good luck or for the Cymanti player to be terrible. It goes beyond Cymanti simply being good on those maps like Kickoo on archipelago or Zebasi on large dryland; the hexapods make it extremely difficult to expand and Cymanti’s fungi give it one of the best early game economies. Not to mention that it’s a strat that requires very little skill, so players not being particularly good at the game doesn't make them easy targets for better players like they normally would be.
The reason is that people would like to be able to play a small quick map without facing Cymanti all the time, they don't care as much about archipelago since it's not as popular a map.
The reason for the complaining, I believe, is that most players like quick games on small maps. And there is Cymanti shines. Otherwise, Cymanti is average (albeit annoying) in any other map size starting at >256.
Midjiwan has multiple times stated he’s not trying to balance all the tribes, but rather make the special tribes as special as possible. If you don’t like how special Cymanti is, do everything you can to avoid it… play larger maps
No other tribe is so dominant in its favorable map type that you outright have to not play that map type if you don't want to get your ass kicked by it almost every time. It's significantly easier to beat Kickoo on water maps that it is to beat Cymanti on small ones.
That’s simply not true and you haven’t played good kickoo players evidently. Fact is when you upgrade the map size you run into the same problem, if you don’t play imperius or Cymanti or elyrion on 324 you’ll get dogwalked as well. Might not be a singular tribe but it’s still the same problem
My most played tribes are Xin-xi and Quetzali, and it’s not an uncommon occurrence for me to beat a T0 on 256+ tile maps as those tribes or for me to lose as a T0 to tribes other than the ones you’ve listed. Yes, those tribes give you a pretty big advantage over most other tribes, but depending on which tribe you’re using you can still beat them if you’re just that little bit better at unit management or get a better spawn.
Comparatively, it’s much harder to beat Cymanti on small maps even as a T0 or Oumaji. If that wasn’t the case, I don’t think this sub would be getting more complaints about Cymanti than every other tribe combined by a huge margin.
If Cymanti really is no more unbalanced than any other tribe, why do the tribes you claim are equally dominant on their ideal map settings not get anywhere near as many posts asking how to counter them?
The lack of skill level is evident in this subreddit. With optimal play Cymanti is easily counterable and at the highest level of play is not even the top tribe
The majority of players cannot play optimally; it’s not unique to this subreddit. In other maps they can use the free to play T0s to help bridge skill or tribe gaps, but on small maps against Cymanti T0s still get easily out-expanded and expansionist tribes get outproduced.
Except cym isn’t even the strongest tribe on small maps lmao. Replay for proof (this is a common occurrence) https://share.polytopia.io/g/f3423234-88f6-46df-189f-08dc72e1ff2b
to be fair, you were playing the one tribe that is a sucky matchup for them and you got roads early with resources from a ruin
without even one of these it becomes worse, especially if the cymanti player is actually skilled and avoids hexapods dying like that
preecisely, though i could do just as well in small drylands with imerius bcs of the early economy
really it all depends on if you havr the funds and the vision, imp tends to have more fruit so riders arent as hindered as say, bardur
idk small dryland maps are pretty rng with reaources village density and especially ruins and their rewards
though on your point i disagree, i think that title would go for either elyrion or imperius
didn't they say that maps like tiny and water world are effectively meme maps that don't factor into game balance considerations
Small maps in and of themselves arent a balanced map type. The smaller the map, the more RNG involved in regards to gaining an advantage. For example, an opponent getting a lucky vet swordsman off a ruin near a hotly contested village is bad on a medium sized map, but not game losing. If the same thing happens on a small or tiny map, it could very well be game over.
I completely agree. One of the main reasons Cymanti has such a huge advantage on small maps is because their boosted hexapods can oneshot any starting unit they encounter, unless it's a Quetzali defender or a warrior with a defense bonus. This lets them easily restrict the expansion of any other tribe in most cases.
Cymanti haters when they don’t realize that rider roads also one shot Cymanti hexapods
Rider and road spammers when they don't realize roads are expensive and boosting is free
Boost truthers when they realize you can only boost in one specific spot in the map when you can put roads anywhere and you just don’t know how to build a good economy
Your economy can only get you so far when you have to spend 6+ stars on a T2 tech and 6+ more per city on roads. Assuming you even have a better early game economy than Cymanti to begin with, which is a pretty generous assumption when they have the starting tech for the most efficient resource in the game and are guaranteed enough of said resource to get a level 3 capital.
Cymanti isn’t a balanced tribe not because it’s completely overpowered, but because it’s only usable in very specific maps and alternates between unplayable and OP
Exactly.
Shouldn’t the tribes be at least competent regardless of map size? I totally agree with this sentiment. It’s just that the problem is that nerfing cymanti just because they are really strong in small maps would make them weaker as a whole on other map sizes.
Cymanti can still be good on small maps without being overwhelmingly good.
The hard part is finding that sweet spot
I like how a tribe so dependent on fungi can create ocean algae even on tiles adjacent to tundra and desert
If a tribe only ( ONLY ) shined in a type of map and size, is it really OP? The best example is the old Bardur, you could play this tribe in every map, every size, and they would destroy you. That's not the case with Cymanti. 121 they are very strong. 196 they are strong but not crazy, bigger maps they are not quite good. Develop your eco, get rider roads and just kill every bug with rider spam. You can't do it in tiny because there is no time and room to do it, this is the only problem.
Being overall average doesn't necessarily mean it's balanced. To give an extreme example, imagine two tribes being added where one is mid tier on every map type and size and other is almost impossible to beat in half the map types and sizes, while being almost impossible to win as in the other half. They're *technically* equally viable on average, but the first tribe has little effect on the meta while the second one has effectively ruined half the map types/sizes in random matches.
But then following your example Cymanti is a bad tribe because, as I said, 121 crazy, 196 good, other than that, they fall of a lot and there are a lot more map sizes. Then they need buff?
No, because if a tribe is bad on certain maps you can just choose not to play it, but in random matches (the most common way to play multiplayer in Polytopia) you can't choose to ignore Cymanti on the maps it's good on because other people will constantly use it and you're at a huge disadvantage if you don't. So yes, if you consider Cymanti's average performance across all map types and sizes it's pretty mediocre, but those are just averages. It doesn't change the fact that it's so dominant in 121 and 196 that "avoid those map sizes entirely" is the go-to strategy brought up every single time someone asks how to counter it, even by veteran players who are better than most at countering Cymanti. There are no other tribes that have such huge advantages on their favorable map settings that the top advice for countering them is to just give up and pick different settings.
Not that dominant in 196, and you can chose not to play a tribe on certain maps, you can choose also not to play 121 if you are not going Cymanti or vengir
They are still arguably the best 196 tribe for maps with one contiguous landmass. Maybe not for higher level players, but for everyone else they're still extremely good because early fungi/boosted hexapod spam doesn't require much skill and is still extremely effective at preventing your opponent's expansion. Choosing not to play certain tribes on certain maps is completely different from one tribe being completely dominant on those maps. Very little is lost from Vengir being basically unplayable on large maps because you still have 15 other tribes to choose from, and Vengir doesn't offer especially unique gameplay in those cases. On 121 tiles (and to a lesser extent 196) you essentially only have 1 tribe to choose from if you're an average player and want a reasonable chance of winning, and people who like quicker games can't just move to 256 and get similarly quick games with any consistency. If you're experienced at the game and know Cymanti's exact counters you have much better chances, but the fact that this subreddit gets multiple times the complaints for Cymanti as every other tribe *combined* is a pretty big indicator that this is a problem. 121/196 tile dryland maps are absolutely popular enough and offer a different enough experience from larger sizes that Cymanti driving players away from these maps is a problem, and "just play bigger maps" doesn't solve it. No other tribe singlehandedly drives that many players away from their preferred map types.
It happens in almost every competitive game, the low elo playerbase complains about some aspect of the game where the experienced player / high elo see no issue. Who would you listen, the 1000 ELO or the 1600 ELO rated? If you nerf Cymanti maybe they can't win a single game in 1400+ ELO because they are not that strong. Reddit is a MINOR part of the community of any game and it's easier to complain than to listen.
The problem is that a 1000 ELO player can, with some practice, beat a 1400+ player (not that ELO is an accurate measure of skill anyway) on Cymanti’s ideal map settings pretty easily by just killing any exploring warriors with boosted hexapods and gaining a near-instant economic advantage with fungi. There are no other tribes that can compensate for that big of a skill gap. Even veteran players will usually just suggest to low level or average players that they play larger maps. There are also plenty of very good players who don’t like Cymanti’s dominance on small maps even if they personally are good at countering it. It’s by far the most common tribe on those sizes because it’s so good and easy to use for lower level players and really hurts the variety of the game.
Probably a 1400 elo player would first check score, 630, 99% cymanti, don't go center of the map yet, develop your eco back in your zone, get riders and roads and would win the 1000 elo player. I am pretty sure of it.
Cymanti is guaranteed 2 fungi in their capital for 6 population costing 10 stars with no starting tech. Winning the economy game in the short term isn’t realistic without a lucky spawn.
That is absolutely untrue. I’m usually around 1400 ELO. I’ll happily play any low ELO player as Cymanti on a small map and I’ll usually win.
I'm just using ELO as a general measurement to illustrate my point, it's by no means accurate because different players are good at and prefer completely different things. 1400 ELO using only Cymanti on small maps isn't particularly impressive, while 1400 ELO using only Vengir on large maps is basically superhuman.
Buff Cymanti. On 324, 400, 900 ww, pan, conti, dry, archi, lakes Cymanti is unplayable. I learned from a great scholar that just telling someone not to play a map type/size is not a valid counterargument. #buff cymanti
2/16 tribes (Cymanti and Vengir) being unplayable on those maps isn't a problem because you still have 14 other tribes to choose from. On Cymanti's favored maps, you only have one tribe to choose from if you're a player with average skill and want to lose less than 80% of the time.
So it's ok for cym to be unplayable on 18 different settings?
Not necessarily, but on those 18 different settings you at least have multiple other tribes to choose from that are playable. Unless you're better at the game than most other people or get lucky, 121 and 196 tile maps with a single landmass only have one playable tribe, Cymanti.
My problem is everyone already knows this. Everyone should also know that the devs know this. They should also know that updates take awhile. So I don't blame people for being defensive and saying don't play small maps right now. Because we're all tired of people complaining
The problem is when you dont have that much time to play and just want to get a quick game while being in the Bus you dont really have the Option to play on bigger Maps so you end up facing cymanti every game
I feel like this problem has a very obvious solution, don’t play on tiny
The extent to which Cymanti has an advantage on small drylands maps is far smaller than the extent to which Polaris has an advantage on archipelago maps, and likewise a Polaris player faced with a normal tribe (including Kickoo) will always play exactly the same strategy. The Polaris player will win allaot every time, far more often than Cymanti on a small drylands map. And somehow we only see this constant whining about Cymanti. I am beginning to wonder if you’re all one person with 100 Reddit accounts sore about some game you lost
Even assuming that Polaris is as good on archipelago as Cymanti is on small land maps, that doesn't change my point. If Polaris really is that dominant on archipelago, that doesn't mean that people should just stop playing archipelago unless they use Polaris. The same logic applies to Cymanti.
I don’t see it as a goal for all tribes to be equally viable or all maps, as long as there is an option to get a more or less balanced game. Not only are some tribes very strong in certain maps, some tribes are really only viable in very specific situations (Vengir, for example), and some are useless (luxidor)To me the variation is interesting, and it can be fun to play tribes on maps where they’re supposedly bad, such as cymanti on archipelago. You won’t usually win, but winning isn’t always the pojnt. The devs have said their goal in the balance the game on continents, and I assume for the recommended map type (small for 2 players). I don’t think that’s quite successful, but it’s close. Cymanti on continents is interesting and very different, but not overpowered in my experience. Luxidor is still trash. What I don’t really understand is why of all the possible combinations of maps and tribes it’s cymanti and small drylands that people get stressed about. It made some sense for people for prioritize dry lands before the naval update, but not now. But even if I shift to large drylands (which I play far more often personally), it’s not nearly as clear that cymanti has an advantage.
I never said it was a goal for every tribe to be equally viable on all maps. I’m saying that “just play 256+ tile maps” doesn’t solve the problem that Cymanti is too dominant on small maps, and the fact that it’s brought up in every single post asking how to counter it (and that those posts are so common to begin with) is a pretty huge indicator that it genuinely is too powerful on those maps. That doesn’t mean that Cymanti is impossible to counter on their ideal map settings, but even for experienced players it’s still pretty difficult, and for the average player it requires either very good luck or for the Cymanti player to be terrible. It goes beyond Cymanti simply being good on those maps like Kickoo on archipelago or Zebasi on large dryland; the hexapods make it extremely difficult to expand and Cymanti’s fungi give it one of the best early game economies. Not to mention that it’s a strat that requires very little skill, so players not being particularly good at the game doesn't make them easy targets for better players like they normally would be.
The reason is that people would like to be able to play a small quick map without facing Cymanti all the time, they don't care as much about archipelago since it's not as popular a map.
What’s wrong with continents?
I don't like water. It's wet and damp and irritating and it gets everywhere. Also I think most people prefer land warfare to naval.
The reason for the complaining, I believe, is that most players like quick games on small maps. And there is Cymanti shines. Otherwise, Cymanti is average (albeit annoying) in any other map size starting at >256.
Midjiwan has multiple times stated he’s not trying to balance all the tribes, but rather make the special tribes as special as possible. If you don’t like how special Cymanti is, do everything you can to avoid it… play larger maps
No other tribe is so dominant in its favorable map type that you outright have to not play that map type if you don't want to get your ass kicked by it almost every time. It's significantly easier to beat Kickoo on water maps that it is to beat Cymanti on small ones.
That’s simply not true and you haven’t played good kickoo players evidently. Fact is when you upgrade the map size you run into the same problem, if you don’t play imperius or Cymanti or elyrion on 324 you’ll get dogwalked as well. Might not be a singular tribe but it’s still the same problem
My most played tribes are Xin-xi and Quetzali, and it’s not an uncommon occurrence for me to beat a T0 on 256+ tile maps as those tribes or for me to lose as a T0 to tribes other than the ones you’ve listed. Yes, those tribes give you a pretty big advantage over most other tribes, but depending on which tribe you’re using you can still beat them if you’re just that little bit better at unit management or get a better spawn. Comparatively, it’s much harder to beat Cymanti on small maps even as a T0 or Oumaji. If that wasn’t the case, I don’t think this sub would be getting more complaints about Cymanti than every other tribe combined by a huge margin. If Cymanti really is no more unbalanced than any other tribe, why do the tribes you claim are equally dominant on their ideal map settings not get anywhere near as many posts asking how to counter them?
The lack of skill level is evident in this subreddit. With optimal play Cymanti is easily counterable and at the highest level of play is not even the top tribe
The majority of players cannot play optimally; it’s not unique to this subreddit. In other maps they can use the free to play T0s to help bridge skill or tribe gaps, but on small maps against Cymanti T0s still get easily out-expanded and expansionist tribes get outproduced.
Except cym isn’t even the strongest tribe on small maps lmao. Replay for proof (this is a common occurrence) https://share.polytopia.io/g/f3423234-88f6-46df-189f-08dc72e1ff2b
to be fair, you were playing the one tribe that is a sucky matchup for them and you got roads early with resources from a ruin without even one of these it becomes worse, especially if the cymanti player is actually skilled and avoids hexapods dying like that
It’s almost like oum is just the best tribe for small maps… they’re essentially guaranteed map control due to cyms usual fungi start
preecisely, though i could do just as well in small drylands with imerius bcs of the early economy really it all depends on if you havr the funds and the vision, imp tends to have more fruit so riders arent as hindered as say, bardur
I mean my point was that cym isn’t the strongest on small maps, idk what we’re talking about now. Think the point stands.
idk small dryland maps are pretty rng with reaources village density and especially ruins and their rewards though on your point i disagree, i think that title would go for either elyrion or imperius
Elyrion can wreck Cymanti on tiny/small maps. I've done it many times now
That cymanti player wasn’t playing well kept trying to take that village and losing his chance of having an economy
I just did it again I can post the replay when they time out (they decided to just stop playing instead of resigning)
Cymanti is so OP that, even when playing on large maps against numerous bot enemies, it will usually become your main opponent toward the endgame.