Civilizations that excel in team games, but suck in 1v1 matches (and vice versa)

AS the title suggest. Think up on civilizations that are great in team games for horrible in 1v1 matches (and vice versa where a civilization is great in 1v1 matches, but horrible in team games).

For me: Best team civilizations, worst 1v1 civilizations: Turks (faster gold mining bonus isn't that significant until Castle Age and early Imperial, meaning they lose a lot of early game rushes, not to mention their trash line sucks. In team games, gold isn't an issue and they have the most gold efficient unique units in team games), Vietnamese (this is no brainer, lack of early game eco bonus means they suck in 1v1 matches, but their Imperial Skirmisher team bonus, revealing enemy positions, and Paper Money UT makes them one of the best team-based civilizations), Koreans (get rolled over in the early game in 1v1, especially in Arabia, but have one of the most useful team bonuses with Onagers and have one of the most gold efficient UU).

Best 1v1 civilizations, Worst team civilizations: Incas (free Llama, more housing support, Villagers benefiting from Blacksmith upgrades, and buildings costing less stone makes them ideal in 1v1 matches, but have a team bonus that is far worse than the Saracens), Malay (duh, faster age advancement bonus and cheaper Battle Elephants makes them excel in the early game like the Vikings and are insane in water maps, but their team bonus of Docks having more LoS is very situational),