OK, thanks. That doesn't mean the Huns are actually broken and need a nerf, though - it just means people don't like playing against them.
Genuinely broken, IMO, would mean that the only sensible choice is to pick that Civ yourself - or play the one Civ that can beat it.
Unless either of those things are true requesting the nerfstick or banhammer seem over the top to me. Although, again for clarity, I'm basing my opinion on the way metagames develop in meat-multiplayer games like Magic: The Gathering and haven't played multiplayer in this game.
Again, thanks. But is it an insurmountable dominant position?
The other aspect here is that playing that way is (or should be, IMO) entirely the opponent's choice. Again, my experience is with things like Magic. I'm a dirty combo deck player (Johnny) - many people level the "no skill of your own" accusation at the combo deck when it goes off. The thing is that they don't tend to notice when the combo deck doesn't go off, or at least they attribute the win in that case to their own skill.
See also: Confirmation Bias, the Dunning-Kruger effect and the Self-Confirming Attribution Error.