I did just the same haha

Why is all of this though? Where this meme comes from?

@@user-ij7fy3fn4n hera likes playing Bulgarians when most other pros don't consider them as a good civ

@@user-ij7fy3fn4nthere is the famous copypasta of course

could be awesome

I played mongols on the New maps for EW and most of the maps have a LOT of Animals that can be used to gain advantage. Yes, its risky but i really dont think they are D tier.

@@konradpyszniak976 the main mongol advantage is speed and the other guy has same eco than you from scratch so no bonus

Nah, empire wars switches things around and makes otherwise less interesting civilizations appealing. No need to always have the same civs around

It is not

For Italians: Outside of the cheaper age-up, they're pretty much generic in the early game. Cheaper fishing ships are also less likely to provide value in Empire Wars when you expect to be attacked early on (i.e. producing fishing ships will likely just result in you losing water control - which means losing the fishing ships before they pay themselves off). If you have any fishing ships in empire wars, then they'll most likely be fishing ships you started with (which of course means no benefit from the discount). The other bonuses are helpful if you get to that point, but you need to actually get to that point (a bit of a tall order when that point is late castle or imperial age). And extra armor from a UT does not provide much value to archers (and again, require you to get to late-castle for any benefit, which may be a tall order in some matches) - certainly nowhere near as good as Ethiopians faster-firing (which is available in Feudal Age and will consistently provide value - armor only provides value if they're getting attacked, and archers with extra armor still get cleaned up quickly). Empire Wars tends to be a fast-paced game mode with lots of army early on, and Italians are more of a late-game civ carried by their flexibility more than their civ bonuses (on land maps - on water, they're also carried by good water timings, as they get the water upgrades much more easily, but that is in castle/imp). The discount on imp will help get up to imp a bit earlier, but the discount on chemistry is a res-saving benefit rather than a timing-benefit (since by the time you finish advancing, you should have enough res for the full-cost upgrade). So overall, they may be good for fast-castle on water maps, but otherwise are rather lack-luster. Celts: they may lose the extra wood from dark age, but they still have a wood-cutting bonus (and a lot of vils start on wood). Therefore, the bonus still provides some value, which I think is why Hera kept them in C-tier (despite losing ~100 wood from dark age). Celts are fully capable of going archers in Feudal age, which does benefit from faster wood-cutting Sicilians: May benefit from the faster fortifications, which would help with defensive game-play and walling up. Not really the go-to Strat in empire wars, but it might be enough of a benefit to push them out of D-tier (but only to bottom of C)

@@jasonsmith1950 Hera said some civs have such bonuses they can go up to Castle quickly. Italians should be considered one of them. I have only watched one match on water with fish. It was Ithmus Viper vs MBL both built docks. In castle a crossbow deals 5+2 damage and have 2 pierce armor. With pavise Italians have 3 pierce armor and only take 4 damage instead of 5. Ethiopians deal 4*1,18 to Italians 5. In Imperial it changes to 6+4 and 4 armor. Ethiopians deal 5*1.388 or 6.938. Italians deal 6*1.176 or 7.056. So armored Italians win head to head, survive longer to return to safety against skirmishers. But their biggest asset is 20% cheaper gunpowder. This makes them a great counter unit against meso as skirm/handcannon destroys eagle/arbalest with the discount. If you face all out plumes you can go skirm/paladin as the time limit allows going hard on gold units. Not to mention how important bombard cannon is huge when pushing castles and trebs. What would you rate Italians. I said the end of A, and they will be picked at the end of 6+ civ drafts because they can counter meso. Ok and Bohemians.

@@mikelivingood7797 Armor techs are a relatively low priority for archer units, and gen bows aren't exactly a power unit. Italians will likely get a castle eventually, but it won't be a high priority. Meanwhile, Ethiopians will be benefitting from their faster fire rate straight from the get go (in feudal even). In a head to head fight, Italian Xbows will take 9 shots each while Ethiopians take 7 each - but that assumes full upgrades (which often won't be the case). It also assumes that they're actually going head-to-head, which might not be the case (Italians have perfectly fine knights after all, and mangonels are also an option). And then there's the possibility of overkill: if 10+ archers fire at the same target, some of the shots will hit a target that is already dead - in that situation, the faster firing archers have an edge over the armored ones (at least until enough archers die). But basically, Italians (if they go archers) will be getting Xbow and fletching-line before the armor techs (maybe ballistics as well). And then in order to have an advantage over generic Xbows, they still need to research 3 armor techs (which adds up to a significant price tag), one of which requires a castle. At best, you're looking at late-castle age before they're fully upgraded (at which point your argument suggests a large impact than I had realized, but only against ranged units). I had a game as Italians against Bohemians lately on the RBW ranked queue. I didn't ever make it to imperial age in that game (though the Bohemians player did). I certainly could have done a better job of spending my resources (and gotten to imp earlier), but even so, Bohemian hand cannons come before condos do. Italians vs Bohemians isn't one-sided because Bohemians are much stronger in castle age. And it also isn't enough to just get up to imperial age: the Italians player still needs an economy strong enough to support a tech switch (the infantry armor techs are crucial, a few attack upgrades are nice as well, and of course some barracks beyond the initial starting one) and condo production. Against Meso civs, the Italians will struggle to survive the early game in empire wars - those are listed high in the tier list because they can spam Eagles and archers right off the bat. Italians don't have any bonuses to help them survive against that early game. Cheaper gunpowder is a great bonus, but that only matters if the game goes to imp (and the Italians player will have to survive a lot of pressure to get to that point). On water maps, their fast castle capabilities will really help (so they could be A-tier in that case), but until they're castle age they'll be pretty generic - players will build extra docks, but those docks will be busy churning out warships (fishing ships are too risky an investment unless you've already won water - different story in dark age, but that's been skipped). On land maps, I think I'd keep them with Hera's C-tier. They might be able to fast castle, but they don't have much in the way of bonuses to take advantage of that - Ethiopians have faster firing Xbows and free pikeman upgrade; Saracens have their market bonuses, camels and their team bonus; Italians have cheaper university techs, which are more often a defensive bonus than an offensive one, and don't help with early castle age pressure, and the cheaper age up (which saves 120 food and only 30 gold). Also, Italians don't have Paladins (only FU Cavalier, which is often more practical in 1v1s anyways) TLDR: Italians would be good on water maps due to their fast castle. On land maps, they have to survive the early-mid game before their bonuses can kick in (which can be a challenge in such a fast-paced game mode)

@jasonsmith1950 I said Italians should be higher because of their value on hybrid maps and use against meso. Eagles and archers are worse than scouts.in Feudal, so meso civs are at a general disadvantage. I said they are at the end of A behind Ethiopians. 2/3 of your disagreement seems to be areas we agree.

@@mikelivingood7797 Remember the reason Hera rated the meso civs high (stronger than they are on standard maps) is because they'll be using the starting barracks while their opponents likely won't (b/c no cavalry means spears aren't useful, and MAAs take extra investment for a unit that isn't that great), which puts them at 2 production buildings (starting barracks + archery range dropped down immediately) to their opponents one (either archery range/stables dropped down immediately). The meso's opponent would have to spend an extra 175 res to match that, and the meso civ can respond with yet another production building (maintaining their production advantage) or by getting a tech (likely fletching, giving them a tech advantage). Full-send is a go-to strat in empire wars, and Italians have nothing to help them survive against that early game. In order to counter meso civs, they need to handle their go-to strat in empire wars. Aztecs have a further production speed bonus, +50 gold, and carry bonus. Mayans start with an extra vil and have cheaper archers. Incas have a food discount (doesn't help with archers, but does help with eagles/spears/skirms) and won't need to build houses for a while. Italians have nothing to help them in Empire Wars Feudal, giving meso civs a better chance to snowball an advantage against them right from the get-go.

Don't speak too soon, he is great but there's no guarantees

@@why_wait LOL! I'll bet you $100 USD Hera wins. I'll use Venmo, Paypal, or Zelle to send you bet if I lose. You want in?

Huh

@@sneedfest3399 Japanese

Oh shit I'm not

And even then the knight-equivalent just slaughtered by skirmishers.