This is the second edition of “Head2Head”. I will be pitting 2 civs from Age of Conquerors against each other to decide who I think has an advantage in a 1v1 fight. As I did with Huns vs Aztecs I will start in dark age and work my way up to imperial age before giving my final decision.

Mayan Pros:

Resources last longer. Many people underestimate how truly powerful this ability can be.

Cheaper archers. Anyone know what beats 20 Crossbowmen? 25 Crossbowmen.

EW harrass. Eagle Warrirs are one of my personal favorite castle/imp units. Cheaper than Kts and better than Light Cav.

Mongol Pros:

Faster working hunters. Many players consider the Mongols to be the FASTEST civ in the game.

Hussars are stronger

Mangudai = OP Cav Archer =D

Better siege units

Dark Age:

In the Dark Age we have an interesting face-off. Mongols have the bonus of EXTREMELY fast hunters, and Mayans have the bonus of resources lasting longer. The Mongol bonus allows them to absolutely FLY through late Dark Age. They will often be 45 seconds to a minute and a half ahead of other players, which doesn’t sound like a lot, but if you think about it in terms of rushing, a mongol player can get a tower up next to your wood supply before you even hit Feudal. Or they can have scouts on their way to your base as you’re arriving to Feudal Age. The Mayan bonus will cause the boar to last LONGER which saves you on wood (because you can get farms later) and is a very very solid long term bonus. However, for a Dark Age game, the Mongols have the clear advantage. In a game where rushes often decide the victor being 1 minute ahead can make or break you as a player.

Feudal Age:

Now, assuming that somehow the two players arrive at Feudal Age at the same time (so that we can isolate each variable) who has the advantage now? The major factors for Feudal Age are: Mongols get access to every type of Feudal Rush. The main thing here is that they can scrush their opponent without fear of being scrushed back. Now, obviously if you’re not a scout rusher this means very little to you. The Mayans on the other hand cannot scrush, but by now their economic bonus is starting to take effect. They’ve gathered around 400 extra food from the boars, berries, sheep and deer that they killed and have saved around 180 wood. This isn’t THAT huge a number, but if you think about it in terms of troops, that could be converted into a bunch of extra archers when Feudal Age is reached. And, as I said before, a great way to beat 20 X-Bows is by having 25 X-Bows. Additionally, Mayan archers cost less. This means that between their economic bonus and their military bonus they can absolutely FLOOD you with archers starting in Feudal Age (and accelerating throughout the rest of the game). So who has the advantage? In my opinion, the Mayan player wins out in a straight Feudal Age comparison, but just BARELY. The reasoning behind this is that archers are such a mandatory Feudal Age unit that the ability to produce so many is huge. HOWEVER, as I said, it was a close one for me. Mayans really are a 1 trick pony in Feudal Age (this coming from a hardcore Mayan player). They can pretty much do one of two things in Feudal Age: Build archers, or build skirmishers. Anytime you are limited to doing 1 thing you become predictable, and therefore preventable. How do you stop mass archers? Skirmishers and scouts. The Mongol player can mass Skirmishers and Scouts before he sees his enemy’s force because he knows the Mayan player is limited in troop choice. Despite this, I still stand by the Mayans having a slight SLIGHT slight edge in Feudal Age (more troops > less troops)

Castle Age:

Castle Age is where things get interesting. By this time the Mayan player has had his economic advantage in full force for quite a while now. Farms are lasting longer before they have to be replanted, wood is lasting longer before you the lumber camp has to be moved, etc. The mongol player on the other hand is now able to build arguably one of the best Castle Age units in the game. The Mangudai. Mangudai are honestly one of the most OP (overpowered) units in the game. You know what I’m talking about if you’ve ever seen an E-Mangudai hit and run again against a Paladin. Absolute insanity. If you haven’t had a stint of playing Mongols exclusively you really should have one. If nothing else it will make you an absolute micro-master. The question is, who has the advantage? Well, at this point the Mayan player has 2 soldier choices. EW and Archers. The Mongol player has 4 choices. Mangudai, Light Cavs, Kts, Cav Archers. The Mongol player has such a wide array of troops to choose from that the real question is what counters a Mayan player best? The answer: kts. Now, you just got through reading about how good the Mangudai and may be wondering why I don’t recommend them as the “staple” in this match up, and the reason is pierce armor. both Plumed Archers and Eagle Warriors have really really good pierce armor. The Mangudai can hit and run all day but it really is fruitless if the other player can absorb the blow as easily as the Mayan player’s units can. That’s why I suggest doing a Knight rush. If the Mongol player Knight rushes in early castle he can disrupt the numbers of archers the Mayan player has, as well as plow through any EW the Mayan has. The Mayan player then makes a choice: Build pikemen, or keep building archers/EW? If he’s smart, he’ll transition into pikemen and archers (knowing that EW are effectively useless) That’s when a Mongol player can make the transition into Mangudai. Mangudai slaughter infantry. Mangudai paired with Kts is a very hard combo to stop. Now, you’ve heard me talk a lot about the Mongol strategy, but what about Mayans? The Mayan player sticks to his guns. What does that mean? A million archers and constant pressure. The Mongol player needs to get a few minutes into Castle Age to get out a critical mass of Kts. The Mayan player has had critical mass of archers since halfway through Feudal Age. He just keeps pumping archers and getting the necassary upgrades to make them powerful. Generally I would also suggest getting EW for harrassment. If you CAN’T harrass, then just get pikemen to guard the archers. But really, the important thing is that you’re just making lots of archers. Try to throw down 5-6 archeries and have them constantly producing. In early Castle you can put on serious pressure. This is really where the Mayan bonus is at it’s peak. In early Castle Age he has more resources and cheaper archers that are about to be upgraded. The Mongol player is really forced in going for Castle Age units (IE Kts and Cav Archers) that you can’t start building until Castle Age. What this means is that the Mongol player is playing catch-up trying to build his Castle-Age army to keep up with the Mayan player who’s been building his Castle Age army since Feudal Age. Who has the edge? Mayans. The Mongol player DOES have access to more strategies, but besides some lucky Mangonel shots there’s not much that can cost efficiently deal with 40 Crossbowmen.

And finally, Imperial Age:

Imperial Age is where the Mongols take back their advantage. They get access to slightly more powerful Hussars which means late-game harrassment they can run by with Hussars and survive more hits than normal while slaughtering farmers and wood-cutters. In really late game there’s very little any player can do to prevent run-bys. What you have to do instead is mitigate the effects as efficiently as possible. These run-bys will get even more deadly as the game progresses and gold runs out on the map. The Mayan player will eventually be bled dry (granted, it willl take much longer than it would take to bleed other civs dry) but no matter how good their economic bonus is, gold doesn’t last forever. Hussars by this point are one of the best units you can get. Cost no gold and are fast. Mayans have to keep plugging away with their eco bonus and hope their enemy runs out of food before the Mayan player runs out of gold (not likely, but possible). In terms of Imperial Age, Mongols having above average Hussars gives them the advantage.

And now the moment of truth. Who is the winner and why? It’s time for Final Comparison:

Mongol player: Fast hunters means fast Feudal. If they can capitalize on that they may be able to off-set the Mayan cheaper archers during Feudal Age.

If the game lasts long, Hussars become an unstoppable force.

Mayan player: resources last longer and cheap archers.

Who is the winner? For this Head2Head I have got to go with the Mayans. Feudal and Castle age armies are just SO much bigger when you’re a Mayan player. Sure the Mongol player has access to units that are good 1v1 or 1v2 vs your units, but as a Mayan player you simply don’t play those odds. Your goal is always to have 3 to 1 archers to enemies. If you manage to hold off the initial Feudal Age aggression for long enough to compensate, you should be able to keep the momentum and hold it throughout the whole game.

Thanks as always for reading, let me know if you have any tips, suggestions, ideas, or complaints. As I always say, I love hearing from my readers.