I'd move the African Civs to the Tad dauting tier, with their eco based around cows and influence and no starting crates. Mexico may be easier to play but strategically all the options it has makes it extremely complex to master.
I find Russians a breeze as they pop villagers quick and Spam infantry. Japanese is my next Civ due to Shrines and Ashigaru Musketeer. I find it tough to play African civs as I can't figure out a strategy with them.
I remember starting the game way back than as an Ottoman and then making every friend of mine start as Ottoman as well. Of course the 90% of the reason was me being biased as a Turkish but still, everyone had a much better time playing Ottoman compared to other civs just because of free villagers.
lol, i STARted with brits but later switched to Ottoman because i love turkey. Cant remember, but a age 3 streamer said something like." most Ottoman players play Ottoman for the love of that Country. Most probably because Ottoman is only Muslim civ on vanilla age 3.
@@coldfury1858 double rax jann. But dev forfeited Ottoman. No improvement nerf only. They are introducing maps bigger & bigger otto is falling of furthermore
If we're talking 1v1 I feel like the list is pretty fair. Maybe disagree with Russia, but that's about it. In team games Russia should be in easy probably, can be a lot more greedy which helps with the issue you have with them. Fun content though. Aoe3 is the best game ever 😅
agreed, i think the learning curve (which is an easy one) is just knowing they need more food in general for inf and vills. After learning food micro, rest is easy and normal, russia suffers from raids very heavily, so thats the only place i reckon that would be tricky for new players
@@peppapig3616 it depends what cards you play out. Fast training ist required and fast build fortress and baracks and the ability for musketeers to build fortresses after one gets destroyed.
Personally, I would switch Turkey and English. The reasoning is that English gets you in a good habit of building houses while at the same time making sure you have vils. But Turkey auto building of vils can lead to bad habits as well as if you're not really managing your vils you risk them just standing there not doing anything to. But at least Turkey more or less forces you to get max vil. Which I can see as a good thing. Still I think the active way of playing the Brits works to their advantage and is a bit easy to get the balance right. EDIT: Also something I find can work against Turkey is that their unit roster is a bit more unorthodox compared to most baseline civs. And the other traditional European civs are more inline with each other.
TRUE, Ottoman can train only one kind of unit (jannissary)from barrack and that that unit can obliterate most musket in age 2. So playing Ottoman is the easiest. You dont need to deal with different unit composition. Secondly, Ottoman is easiest civ to micro, cause needs less hunts+free vills. Finaaly Ottoman fast Fortress one of the easiest winning strategy,.just 20 jans& 2 falcs, Protect falcs and game over. But at higher level Ottoman struggles too much.
My comments: move Russia down to Okay, swap Mexico and US, move Dutch to Okay. No other real arguments otherwise. Dutch with their auto gather buildings matches with thr other autogather civs, but not tricky. Mexico has so many more options available than US and New mechanics so I'd swap those two. Russia is not really a hard civ to learn, they're a typical Euro civ and the macro for the infantry units is pretty much the same as other euro civs. The hardest thing about Russia is that you can easily pop cap yourself without paying attention.
7:12 China should go in tricky. They're not hard to play. They're just tricky. But as with anything. You learn and it's easy. They're not a hard civ. They're not like the Aztecs. China is very powerful, can easily destroy enemies. Unlike Aztec where you actually have to be careful and know what you're doing. There's no factories and overwhelming military power that will take care of you in long term.
I disagree with roughly half of this. The Dutch have to play more differently to put up their banks compared to other civs that have houses generating resources. If you got the banks running it's straightforward, but the early game is tricky/ daunting. So in total I'd say they are okay/tricky. Germany is easy. You start with 3 villagers that each count as 2 and you'll get a free heavy cav with each age 2+ shipment. The only difficult part of this is that you need to consider the pop from shipments and build houses a little earlier. USA and both African civs should be in daunting. Your unit roster/ strenghts & weaknesses depend on your age up choices. On top of that they also have other new mechanics. India I'd say is tricky to get used to the right amount of villagers required on wood, but aside from that they are rather generic. Wonders aren't really that diffcult to work with (still easy than european age up), but to handle the consulate well is something else, which are things that all asian civs have. Haudene... Iroqouis are basically a european civ (unit roster is very similar) that has muskets that cost wood instead of gold. By the time you get to this point you have enough villagers to easily handle this. There are some other differences, but they are all very easy to handle. This should be in easy. Aztecs have a unique unit roster, but not many strange mechanics. I'd say they are okay. Lakota don't really have a very unique unit roster. The pictures and names are often different and stats are slightly different, but for all intend an purposes they are a lot like the european civs. They have replacement of xbow, spearman, skirmisher, hussar and dragoon/ cav archer. Because of teepee builing in battles and more cav focused I'd still put them in tricky though. Russia has batch training, but that isn't all that complicated. I'd say easy.
@@DakkaDakkaDakkaWaagh Played 5 rank games and lost 1. I don't really care about rank, but want to enjoy the game, which I can do better in normal lobbies. I've played the game since the original release date. Which of my takes are wrong in your opinion and why? You could at least mentioned that, because right now your comment looks silly.
@@Vincrand Wasn't sure if you were actually going to reply so didn't want to waste time. Ranked is quite different from social gaming. Dutch. Your criticism is that building banks is a steep learning curve. It's really not. The concept is actually a lot easier than India, as gold is required for a lot of units. Most newcomers like to turtle and dutch is really good at turtle/boom. Because you don't have many options the argument is that it is more straight forward. As say the Brits there are multiple options to go for, ff, semi-ff, even rush, etc. The options make it hard to play even though the concept of eco remains the same. Not only that but dutch has a relatively easy mid to late game compared to Aztecs or Russians for example. Germany is one of the best and hardest skill caps as a civ. Your description of pop capping yourself is really not what makes Germany hard. Cav macro is a hard skill to master and if you can do it well Germany is amazing. One of the best civs in the game. If you can't do it well then it's very easy in ranked play to get wrecked as uhlans are low health compared to hus. I would say this is large difference between ranked and social. I agree African civs should probably daunting. A big reason is mainly because they are different though not actually hard. If you just started the game and didn't have a base knowledge of how to play European civ eco then it would be easier to pick up African eco than I think us old heads find. But I do agree they are challenging to learn. He put USA in tricky. Not sure how you would convince me they are harder to play than Lakota or the African civs. They are an artillery civ. And I don't think your unit choices are as drastically different on age up compared to the African civs. Saying wonders are easier to age up is wild. European you click a button. Asian civs you have to pull vils off resources yes you can build vils during age up but cause indian vils cost wood and age up costs food it gets weird really quick. Even compared to dutch its hard to get right especially age 2 when wood is so valuable for buildings and tech. They well deserved to be in daunting. Iroquois I would put in ok. They are not as hard as the Lakota or Aztecs because as you say they have more euro unit pool but they are not as easy as euro civs due to micro heavy marketplace. I think you might not understand how crucial marketplace micro play is to succeeding as natives. Aztec have the most powerful marketplace which makes it's usage crucial. This is as you might say "a strange mechanic" that and the importance of the warchief, and a lack of antiskirm and a not straight forward late game make them hard to play well. Not sure why you disagree with Lakota but put them in tricky anyway lol. Their unit pool is heavy cav based which makes unit skill high ceiling and because all of the natives are early game civs it makes them harder to play well as you have less time to succeed. Russia is hard to play again because of unit macro and low quality units. Batch training is harder to eco well than you think because you can't start training 1 you have to train in groups. This might seem small but in ranked play it's huge as top elo players start building 1 unit early and add the queue to max out just before spawn to reduce training time. Econ margins are really tight and when playing Russia you have to be really onto I to not pop cap or get behind on building units especially cause unit quality is bad. 10 strelets will get demolished by any other 10 musket/skim group
@@DakkaDakkaDakkaWaagh A bank is essentially a batch of 7 villagers that cost 0 pop. They are rather easily rushed down when not played well. Their mid-end game is rather strong. They also have a rush option with halbs. Against booming and fast fortress they do well, but againt a rush a new player will lose nearly 100% of the time. The hard part about booming civs in general is that you need to know how much you can boom and that depends on hat civ the other is playing. I said that Germany is a strong civ and that pop capping yourself is one of the biggest issues, meaning they barely have any problems at all. Raiding with cav early on has indeed a steep learning curve, but even done with less experience it will have a noticeable effect. The Uhlan kinda suck in bigger battles, but their high attack make it easier to pick of those villagers in (mainly) age 2. Wonders need villagers to age up fastr, but because you can still train villagers while going aage up you'll end up with a stronger eco. On top of that the wonders usually provide stronger bonuses then a regular age up. In case of the Indian wood cost. You'll need to switch a set amount of food gatherers to wood for each TC and you won't really need to think about it again (maybe shift 1 more vil for different market upgrade priority). Aztecs have coyote runners as anti-skirm. I rather have horses, because they don't care about arty. My biggest disagreement with the vid is that the unit roster would be unique and difficult to understand. They have 2 unique units in the prowler and rifle rider, but all the other units are variants of European civs. For nr games they can also have very strong eco with incredibly high hunting rates and the infinite age 4 bison card. I agree with you that Russian batch training has the disadvantage of slower training time (in case the player starts of with 1). Their units are indeed weaker in 1v1, but they are in general more cost efficient. The blockhouse is also very cost efficient. It cost 250 wood, but provides a value of 500 wood. These cost efficiency bonuses that Russia has also means that the penalty of the batch training isn't as hard as it seems. For a unit to cost twice as much and have the same efficiency it's damage and hp multipliers need to be 3 when multiplied together. So 100 cost, 100 hp, 10 damage and 200 cost, 200 hp, 15 damage is the same for cost. It's kinda wacky, because this means that for 1 -> 2 pop the multiplier is 3, same for 2 -> 4 pop. But for 1 -> 4 pop it's actually 10 and not 9. So it's difficult to generate a good formula for this.
Native civs are the hardest. They don't get factories. They don't get heavy artillery. Native civs is for master players who can end the game quickly. As their eco and military only goes so far. Thus even when they fight, they have to be very strategic.
I love the Ottamans because of the strong units, but I can feel the villiger mechanic is a huge disadvantage. They train very slowly and you cannot build stable economy, because it needs million time. And you waste 99 slots from millitary because they are not even buffed villigers. I would like it more of they just take out that mechanic.
I would define your metric better. "Hardest" could mean many different things. It seems to be a mix of low-tier and difficult to learn from the semantics.
did they nerf livestock market? Was playing a match yesterday and normally i wait the first cow to worth 200 wood to sell and make my first house but when i was around 10 vils and needed that house, my livestock was worth only almost 100 wood, that was really annyong, didn't played the game after until now to test this but if they did, Ethiopia is really bad now with the market so slowly in worth of livestock
That’s strange. I’ve been trying to main Ethiopia, and I wait for my first cow to be 150 wood before selling it, however it doesn’t take very long at all to hit that price. I usually have around 7 settlers when I sell for the 150 wood.
@@alastairtivy-harris8129 played days after this and was back to normal, i dunno what happened that game, just know i had a great loss, hahahah. But looks normal after this with Ethiopia and Hausa, that i am doing better latelly with Hausa than Ethiopia
@@julberndt Glad to hear it! I've been exploring the African civs recently and have been having so much fun with Ethiopia that I think they've become my new main.
Could anyone explain me what makes Incas easier than Aztecs? Both are my favorites, both use the Plaza (which I consider not essential in most not-late game not-high rank matches). Aztecs have MASSIVELY superior units compared to Incas' trash. Yeah, Incas have better economy, buildings, more options (btw. how can they counter early mercenary push?). However, all of that makes them definitely much more complex and difficult to master. I really put a lot of effort to master them, then gave up. On the other side, Aztecs feel like the easiest civs of all. Basically you can just learn what their units do/counter and then just mass anything that suits the situation. All equally skilled opponents are in trouble, bcs you can put continuous pressure from early on, always having the superior units for the price.
What i like about the aztecs are the artilleryunits called arrowknights. Once they come in big numbers every building near them gets destroyed and they can move quick to another place to cause more destruction. The Jaguar Knights need to protect them against cavs. I played them mostly in hard AI with random alliance and enemies in 2vs2 battles and 10 min. treaty.
your list it odd for tr. A Breeze should be: "Germen, Dutch, Russians" Easy: "Span, Port, Japan, Maltese, Italians" Okay : "Sweden, French, Ottomans, British, Indians, Chinese, Aztecs" Tricky : "USA, Mexico, Lakota, Haudenosaunee" Tad Daunting: "Ethiopians, Hausa" This is for more 40min to 60min tr game
Sweden is definately not easy, i think it deserves to be in in the hardest tier level no doubt. Also how are British harder than ottomans? disagree. Dutch? Fine i guess if defending from early rushes is easy for you. But i think they deserve middle. WHY is Russia not in Easy or A breeze??? HOW Does it not deserve even an okay rank?? THIS VIDEO IS TOTALLY LAZY, 0 EFFORT into considering the classes. Z-E-R-O If u base certain civs into categories by autogathering, why arent Japan and Dutch in the same category?
Ottomans are easy bcs you don't need to get distracted by producing villagers (which costs a lot effort and other resources), in later stages you can even carelessly lose them as they are for free and easily rapidly AUTOMATICALLY replaceable.
I don't get the reasoning behind putting Spanish in Easy tier and Ottoman in A Breeze. You literally said Spain is straightforward and everything, while you do have to understand the Mosque mechanic for the Ottomans.
Native civs are the hardest. They don't get factories. They don't get heavy artillery. Native civs is for master players who can end the game quickly. Are resourceful,, know how to eco effectively, how to fight, and more importantly- when to fight. Their eco and military only goes so far. Thus even when they fight, they have to be very strategic. Obviously Sioux is the easiest of the 3. Then iriquois, they get artil. Then Aztec.
Aztec might not have heavy artillery, but your opponent won't have them either or they'll waste a lot of resources if they do. That can actually be said about iroquois and Sioux to.
I'd move the African Civs to the Tad dauting tier, with their eco based around cows and influence and no starting crates. Mexico may be easier to play but strategically all the options it has makes it extremely complex to master.
also I feel like U.S. and Mexico have underrated strategies that can work in mid/late game
I find Russians a breeze as they pop villagers quick and Spam infantry. Japanese is my next Civ due to Shrines and Ashigaru Musketeer. I find it tough to play African civs as I can't figure out a strategy with them.
@@elduquecaradura1468 Agreed. I like USA. The Gattling gun is really cool. 😁😁😁
I remember starting the game way back than as an Ottoman and then making every friend of mine start as Ottoman as well. Of course the 90% of the reason was me being biased as a Turkish but still, everyone had a much better time playing Ottoman compared to other civs just because of free villagers.
lol, i STARted with brits but later switched to Ottoman because i love turkey. Cant remember, but a age 3 streamer said something like." most Ottoman players play Ottoman for the love of that Country.
Most probably because Ottoman is only Muslim civ on vanilla age 3.
@@asifcra7839 Well honestly back in the day.. They were the best civ hands down, now they are okay of course but back then.. yikes
@@coldfury1858 double rax jann. But dev forfeited Ottoman. No improvement nerf only. They are introducing maps bigger & bigger otto is falling of furthermore
I just hate how they keep producing Civs indefinitely. That feature just annoy the shit out of me
Really appreciate your AOE3 content Widgie! Keep on going!
I appreciate it, thanks man
If we're talking 1v1 I feel like the list is pretty fair. Maybe disagree with Russia, but that's about it. In team games Russia should be in easy probably, can be a lot more greedy which helps with the issue you have with them. Fun content though. Aoe3 is the best game ever 😅
agreed, i think the learning curve (which is an easy one) is just knowing they need more food in general for inf and vills. After learning food micro, rest is easy and normal, russia suffers from raids very heavily, so thats the only place i reckon that would be tricky for new players
@@peppapig3616 it depends what cards you play out. Fast training ist required and fast build fortress and baracks and the ability for musketeers to build fortresses after one gets destroyed.
Widgie: "Spain is straight forward civ with nothing too strange about them."
Spain: Logistician 7 falc play entering the chat like: 😮😮😮😮😮😮😮
Spain is special in that its missionaries give an extremely powerful military boost.
Personally, I would switch Turkey and English. The reasoning is that English gets you in a good habit of building houses while at the same time making sure you have vils. But Turkey auto building of vils can lead to bad habits as well as if you're not really managing your vils you risk them just standing there not doing anything to. But at least Turkey more or less forces you to get max vil. Which I can see as a good thing. Still I think the active way of playing the Brits works to their advantage and is a bit easy to get the balance right.
EDIT: Also something I find can work against Turkey is that their unit roster is a bit more unorthodox compared to most baseline civs. And the other traditional European civs are more inline with each other.
TRUE, Ottoman can train only one kind of unit (jannissary)from barrack and that that unit can obliterate most musket in age 2. So playing Ottoman is the easiest. You dont need to deal with different unit composition. Secondly, Ottoman is easiest civ to micro, cause needs less hunts+free vills. Finaaly Ottoman fast Fortress one of the easiest winning strategy,.just 20 jans& 2 falcs, Protect falcs and game over. But at higher level Ottoman struggles too much.
My comments: move Russia down to Okay, swap Mexico and US, move Dutch to Okay. No other real arguments otherwise. Dutch with their auto gather buildings matches with thr other autogather civs, but not tricky. Mexico has so many more options available than US and New mechanics so I'd swap those two. Russia is not really a hard civ to learn, they're a typical Euro civ and the macro for the infantry units is pretty much the same as other euro civs. The hardest thing about Russia is that you can easily pop cap yourself without paying attention.
Thanks for the early Christmas present Widgie. This is super helpful!
Update?
7:12
China should go in tricky.
They're not hard to play.
They're just tricky. But as with anything. You learn and it's easy.
They're not a hard civ.
They're not like the Aztecs.
China is very powerful, can easily destroy enemies. Unlike Aztec where you actually have to be careful and know what you're doing. There's no factories and overwhelming military power that will take care of you in long term.
I disagree with roughly half of this.
The Dutch have to play more differently to put up their banks compared to other civs that have houses generating resources. If you got the banks running it's straightforward, but the early game is tricky/ daunting. So in total I'd say they are okay/tricky.
Germany is easy. You start with 3 villagers that each count as 2 and you'll get a free heavy cav with each age 2+ shipment. The only difficult part of this is that you need to consider the pop from shipments and build houses a little earlier.
USA and both African civs should be in daunting. Your unit roster/ strenghts & weaknesses depend on your age up choices. On top of that they also have other new mechanics.
India I'd say is tricky to get used to the right amount of villagers required on wood, but aside from that they are rather generic. Wonders aren't really that diffcult to work with (still easy than european age up), but to handle the consulate well is something else, which are things that all asian civs have.
Haudene... Iroqouis are basically a european civ (unit roster is very similar) that has muskets that cost wood instead of gold. By the time you get to this point you have enough villagers to easily handle this. There are some other differences, but they are all very easy to handle. This should be in easy.
Aztecs have a unique unit roster, but not many strange mechanics. I'd say they are okay.
Lakota don't really have a very unique unit roster. The pictures and names are often different and stats are slightly different, but for all intend an purposes they are a lot like the european civs. They have replacement of xbow, spearman, skirmisher, hussar and dragoon/ cav archer. Because of teepee builing in battles and more cav focused I'd still put them in tricky though.
Russia has batch training, but that isn't all that complicated. I'd say easy.
Mate what elo are you? Cause most of your takes are not great imo.
@@DakkaDakkaDakkaWaagh Played 5 rank games and lost 1. I don't really care about rank, but want to enjoy the game, which I can do better in normal lobbies. I've played the game since the original release date. Which of my takes are wrong in your opinion and why? You could at least mentioned that, because right now your comment looks silly.
@@Vincrand Wasn't sure if you were actually going to reply so didn't want to waste time. Ranked is quite different from social gaming.
Dutch. Your criticism is that building banks is a steep learning curve. It's really not. The concept is actually a lot easier than India, as gold is required for a lot of units. Most newcomers like to turtle and dutch is really good at turtle/boom. Because you don't have many options the argument is that it is more straight forward. As say the Brits there are multiple options to go for, ff, semi-ff, even rush, etc. The options make it hard to play even though the concept of eco remains the same. Not only that but dutch has a relatively easy mid to late game compared to Aztecs or Russians for example.
Germany is one of the best and hardest skill caps as a civ. Your description of pop capping yourself is really not what makes Germany hard. Cav macro is a hard skill to master and if you can do it well Germany is amazing. One of the best civs in the game. If you can't do it well then it's very easy in ranked play to get wrecked as uhlans are low health compared to hus. I would say this is large difference between ranked and social.
I agree African civs should probably daunting. A big reason is mainly because they are different though not actually hard. If you just started the game and didn't have a base knowledge of how to play European civ eco then it would be easier to pick up African eco than I think us old heads find. But I do agree they are challenging to learn.
He put USA in tricky. Not sure how you would convince me they are harder to play than Lakota or the African civs. They are an artillery civ. And I don't think your unit choices are as drastically different on age up compared to the African civs.
Saying wonders are easier to age up is wild. European you click a button. Asian civs you have to pull vils off resources yes you can build vils during age up but cause indian vils cost wood and age up costs food it gets weird really quick. Even compared to dutch its hard to get right especially age 2 when wood is so valuable for buildings and tech. They well deserved to be in daunting.
Iroquois I would put in ok. They are not as hard as the Lakota or Aztecs because as you say they have more euro unit pool but they are not as easy as euro civs due to micro heavy marketplace.
I think you might not understand how crucial marketplace micro play is to succeeding as natives. Aztec have the most powerful marketplace which makes it's usage crucial. This is as you might say "a strange mechanic" that and the importance of the warchief, and a lack of antiskirm and a not straight forward late game make them hard to play well.
Not sure why you disagree with Lakota but put them in tricky anyway lol. Their unit pool is heavy cav based which makes unit skill high ceiling and because all of the natives are early game civs it makes them harder to play well as you have less time to succeed.
Russia is hard to play again because of unit macro and low quality units. Batch training is harder to eco well than you think because you can't start training 1 you have to train in groups. This might seem small but in ranked play it's huge as top elo players start building 1 unit early and add the queue to max out just before spawn to reduce training time. Econ margins are really tight and when playing Russia you have to be really onto I to not pop cap or get behind on building units especially cause unit quality is bad. 10 strelets will get demolished by any other 10 musket/skim group
@@DakkaDakkaDakkaWaagh A bank is essentially a batch of 7 villagers that cost 0 pop. They are rather easily rushed down when not played well. Their mid-end game is rather strong. They also have a rush option with halbs. Against booming and fast fortress they do well, but againt a rush a new player will lose nearly 100% of the time. The hard part about booming civs in general is that you need to know how much you can boom and that depends on hat civ the other is playing.
I said that Germany is a strong civ and that pop capping yourself is one of the biggest issues, meaning they barely have any problems at all. Raiding with cav early on has indeed a steep learning curve, but even done with less experience it will have a noticeable effect. The Uhlan kinda suck in bigger battles, but their high attack make it easier to pick of those villagers in (mainly) age 2.
Wonders need villagers to age up fastr, but because you can still train villagers while going aage up you'll end up with a stronger eco. On top of that the wonders usually provide stronger bonuses then a regular age up. In case of the Indian wood cost. You'll need to switch a set amount of food gatherers to wood for each TC and you won't really need to think about it again (maybe shift 1 more vil for different market upgrade priority).
Aztecs have coyote runners as anti-skirm. I rather have horses, because they don't care about arty.
My biggest disagreement with the vid is that the unit roster would be unique and difficult to understand. They have 2 unique units in the prowler and rifle rider, but all the other units are variants of European civs. For nr games they can also have very strong eco with incredibly high hunting rates and the infinite age 4 bison card.
I agree with you that Russian batch training has the disadvantage of slower training time (in case the player starts of with 1). Their units are indeed weaker in 1v1, but they are in general more cost efficient. The blockhouse is also very cost efficient. It cost 250 wood, but provides a value of 500 wood. These cost efficiency bonuses that Russia has also means that the penalty of the batch training isn't as hard as it seems.
For a unit to cost twice as much and have the same efficiency it's damage and hp multipliers need to be 3 when multiplied together. So 100 cost, 100 hp, 10 damage and 200 cost, 200 hp, 15 damage is the same for cost. It's kinda wacky, because this means that for 1 -> 2 pop the multiplier is 3, same for 2 -> 4 pop. But for 1 -> 4 pop it's actually 10 and not 9. So it's difficult to generate a good formula for this.
Sir, Mexico has to be the most difficult civ hands down.
Beter yet, mexico deserves its own tier "Mexican lvl"
Mexico borrows heavily from Euro civs. Yes, most options. I'd say the Native civs are the most difficult to learn for new players.
Native civs are the hardest.
They don't get factories.
They don't get heavy artillery.
Native civs is for master players who can end the game quickly. As their eco and military only goes so far.
Thus even when they fight, they have to be very strategic.
I love the Ottamans because of the strong units, but I can feel the villiger mechanic is a huge disadvantage. They train very slowly and you cannot build stable economy, because it needs million time. And you waste 99 slots from millitary because they are not even buffed villigers. I would like it more of they just take out that mechanic.
Very nice video widgie! Helps a lot! Hugs from brazil
I would define your metric better. "Hardest" could mean many different things. It seems to be a mix of low-tier and difficult to learn from the semantics.
did they nerf livestock market? Was playing a match yesterday and normally i wait the first cow to worth 200 wood to sell and make my first house but when i was around 10 vils and needed that house, my livestock was worth only almost 100 wood, that was really annyong, didn't played the game after until now to test this but if they did, Ethiopia is really bad now with the market so slowly in worth of livestock
That’s strange. I’ve been trying to main Ethiopia, and I wait for my first cow to be 150 wood before selling it, however it doesn’t take very long at all to hit that price. I usually have around 7 settlers when I sell for the 150 wood.
@@alastairtivy-harris8129 played days after this and was back to normal, i dunno what happened that game, just know i had a great loss, hahahah. But looks normal after this with Ethiopia and Hausa, that i am doing better latelly with Hausa than Ethiopia
@@julberndt Glad to hear it! I've been exploring the African civs recently and have been having so much fun with Ethiopia that I think they've become my new main.
Russia... tricky... really?
Bruh
Most apeshit easy nation there is, bar France and Britain.
Crazy how you say india on wood is the main reason to put them in daunting but dutch which have gold vills are in easy
Could anyone explain me what makes Incas easier than Aztecs? Both are my favorites, both use the Plaza (which I consider not essential in most not-late game not-high rank matches). Aztecs have MASSIVELY superior units compared to Incas' trash. Yeah, Incas have better economy, buildings, more options (btw. how can they counter early mercenary push?). However, all of that makes them definitely much more complex and difficult to master. I really put a lot of effort to master them, then gave up. On the other side, Aztecs feel like the easiest civs of all. Basically you can just learn what their units do/counter and then just mass anything that suits the situation. All equally skilled opponents are in trouble, bcs you can put continuous pressure from early on, always having the superior units for the price.
Inca have auto gathering buildings and don’t have to rely on the community plaza as much which involves switching dances and higher APM.
What i like about the aztecs are the artilleryunits called arrowknights. Once they come in big numbers every building near them gets destroyed and they can move quick to another place to cause more destruction. The Jaguar Knights need to protect them against cavs. I played them mostly in hard AI with random alliance and enemies in 2vs2 battles and 10 min. treaty.
your list it odd for tr. A Breeze should be: "Germen, Dutch, Russians" Easy: "Span, Port, Japan, Maltese, Italians" Okay : "Sweden, French, Ottomans, British, Indians, Chinese, Aztecs" Tricky : "USA, Mexico, Lakota, Haudenosaunee" Tad Daunting: "Ethiopians, Hausa" This is for more 40min to 60min tr game
"80% there in how my perception changed" counting out of the 20 civs how many are in different brackets than prior, 12 / 20 or 60% changed.
where Malta?
This was before Italy and Malta were released. I might do an update on this in the future
Sweden is definately not easy, i think it deserves to be in in the hardest tier level no doubt.
Also how are British harder than ottomans? disagree.
Dutch? Fine i guess if defending from early rushes is easy for you. But i think they deserve middle.
WHY is Russia not in Easy or A breeze??? HOW Does it not deserve even an okay rank??
THIS VIDEO IS TOTALLY LAZY, 0 EFFORT into considering the classes. Z-E-R-O
If u base certain civs into categories by autogathering, why arent Japan and Dutch in the same category?
Ottomans are easy bcs you don't need to get distracted by producing villagers (which costs a lot effort and other resources), in later stages you can even carelessly lose them as they are for free and easily rapidly AUTOMATICALLY replaceable.
Where's Hole in the Wall gang!? lol
You should do best to worst
I don’t think I have the best opinion for this, I might need some help in deciding
👍
I don't get the reasoning behind putting Spanish in Easy tier and Ottoman in A Breeze. You literally said Spain is straightforward and everything, while you do have to understand the Mosque mechanic for the Ottomans.
Mosque mechanic? Like 2 buttons, each containing one sentence? Really? In compare to continuously checking your villagers' queue?
@@milanpm1 it might not be very intuitive for new players to figure out they have to build a mosque in order to increase their villager pop
Native civs are the hardest.
They don't get factories.
They don't get heavy artillery.
Native civs is for master players who can end the game quickly. Are resourceful,, know how to eco effectively, how to fight, and more importantly- when to fight.
Their eco and military only goes so far.
Thus even when they fight, they have to be very strategic.
Obviously Sioux is the easiest of the 3.
Then iriquois, they get artil.
Then Aztec.
Aztec might not have heavy artillery, but your opponent won't have them either or they'll waste a lot of resources if they do. That can actually be said about iroquois and Sioux to.
@@Vincrand you're obviously new..
@@ThePresentation010 Not as new as the warchiefs expansion.