This may seem like a silly question but I mostly play with my friends against the AI so I don’t know what country’s are actually competitive in multiplayer. I know some countries may be better than others but are there any that just suck? I like to play as Germany and Portugal but I’m worried that when I start to play multiplayer I’ll get whooped so I’m just looking to get some advice on the different countries.
1 Like
in aoe3 almost any civ is viable. However, some are more viable than others. Germany and Ports for example, are solid civs that do well but require good game skills such as micro, macro, and timings. there are plenty of good videos and guides for said civs as well.
The most broken civs are otto, who are just so easy to use in a complex game like aoe3 their strength is that unless opponent plays perfect they will almost always win due to how insanely easy it is to fight with their units/remass/shipment curve. The other one is usa which like otto, more tricky but far more op when used right, has a plethora of overturned options that all simply output more than other civs equivilents. better goon in age2, huge light infantry shipments, russian american company, good timings, strong musk, rolling art. etc et. usa the only universally seen as op civ which says something
That said, most civs are fine. really only russia dutch malta seem to struggle at every elo. inca/japan/italy also appear to have a really rough time cept a few builds. everyone else seems to be doing ok win rate, matchup, playrate, and subjective opinion wise. So if you play germany and portgual, youll have a good time i think just learn some builds and have fun!
9 Likes
Thanks for the information!
2 Likes
To expound a bit about Russia, I think part of their issue is that Ottoman are such a hard counter that it hurts them overall.
Ottomans are super popular so any civ that struggles into them as much as Russia does will appear worse overall.
Russia is probably better than it appears imo and will be improved indirectly were Ottomans to receive the right nerfs.
Personally, I wonder if it would be possible to increase the base hp of Strelets slightly. They’d only need to hit 76hp to survive 4 Delis hits. That would mean 95 base HP up from 90 (still -20% from the civ bonus). Strelet Combat or New Order Infantry could even lose 5% Strelet hp if needed.
Edit: Welcome to the community @danjhanson11!
3 Likes
Hell just remove tp maps and/or 2+ safe hunts
Facing russia with 1 hunt and no tp is a much, much different beast
And you now have RE meta. No thanks.
3 Likes
i think dutch is more viable for noobs because they have a boomy eco and less hunt needed and extra pop space
As @vividlyplain said, I don’t think we want to return to the RE meta. Thus the suggestion. The extra 5 hp on Strelets would be massive against Delis who counter them way harder than is reasonable. You already have Abus, but the addition of another UU to replace Ottoman’s Hussars made an already bad MU way worse for no reason.
1 Like
@Kingfisher1787 to be clear im not advocating we go back to a pure RE meta, i was trying to point out russia is a strong civ not purely due to raw stats but simply the civ was designed and balanced for a meta that no longer is common. So like russia dutch on balkan mountains is different than dakota than bengal then cascade range. When asking for buffs or nerfs or which civ is good, i think including the context of those civs as the meta is likely to change or evolve and the common 2+tp meta we have now may not be the meta of 2025,2026. Making changes to a specific meta can often lead to mass issues down the road. ie china tea export card shifted china is top status for several patches as the meta went more and more TP heavy (and still does a bit.) I didnt really expand on that in the above, but now my word vomit hopefully makes sense that im not advocating for a return, just recongizing russia as a civ is optimal in a meta that is not longer meta and would be optimal once more despite no other changes, simply if said meta returned.
And yeah vs otto like the supercharged age2 units vs age1 units probably always gonna be tough, but simply shifting a map pool would allieviate that. Albeit i think now otto does wreck russia in almost any 1v1 scenario
2 Likes
What is the RE meta? And what’s the current meta?
2 Likes
If you get wooped in multiplayer it won’t be because of the meta, but because of a skill gap. The meta only matters in the top 500 
Also, it’s not “countries” but “civilizations”
1 Like
Thats not how a ladder works at all.
If you are rank 5000, you should vs ranks 5000 or close. There should be no skill gap or small one. And into same skilled people a meta will form as said cadre of players works to improve their skills. As someone who likes low elo content, ive casted enough games to observed the meta shift at this level and some civs do better. You actually can’t just bot pro builds until youve built the foundation of skills against same people. How to adapt, swap cards, send cards etc is a skill you need to learn real time into your meta, whether 700 elo 1200 elo or 1700 elo even 2200 elo. And understanding what civs and strategies are occurring at your ladder is important.
So no, just handwaiving peoples needs under a certain elo is not productive. Ironically because how small our high level gameplay is, it makes their meta way more about persons and less about meta- like hazza playing russia and japan well doesnt mean those civs are good but that hazza is kind of better than the few people ranked high enough to face him
Anyways im probably going off topic but to circle back, asking if a civ or strategy is viable at any level is a legit question. The “well only balance mayters st x elo” is a shortsighted approach assumes 2 lower players are devoid of skill when in reality they are probbaly using the skills appropriate for their level.
2 Likes
also so you know
RE- the final patch of the asian dynasties expansion (TAD) which was the std version of aoe3 played until DE. so RE usually refers to the strategies adn balance, meta, maps etc of pre aoe3 DE. Also, there was a fan patch for RE; the ESOC path (EP) often played on which was popular and is often reference. DE is considered ofc anything since the release of DE. We are in a DE meta, often contrasted with earlier RE metas.
just some aoe3 terms clear up!
1 Like
If we’re talking about 1v1, I have to thouroughly disagree with some of your examples. Russia is not struggling at all in most elos, in fact, they seem to be doing rather well between the 1400 and 1700 elo, at least as far as most of the data shows. Secondly, according to most data that I’ve found, Portuguese are consistently one of the worst civs in the game, constantly having bottom 5 win rates while having a bellow average play rate and has almost as many bad match ups as the Dutch. There’s also plenty of other civs with terrible win rates across all elo in 1v1, like Mexicans and Ethiopians. And finally, I would add that there are some few other civs besides US and Ottomans that are also overly tuned in the game right now, like Chinese and Aztec.
1 Like
Yeah stat wise you correct, i was just generalizing summaries of the community where feels civs stand
Fwiw russia is a negative elo inflator last i checked but not super bad, like -50 or such so dunno if its enough to affect win rates like some of ottos historically (iirc 142+ at a point) id have to crunch more numbers to see
2 Likes
Thanks for the information 