If Italians have access to halbs/ camel line, I will definitely accept it to be a niche unit in team games. Even Saracens have an expensive mameluke, they can still counter cavalry well given their tankier camels. But Italians has to rely on GC even in 1 vs 1 games. Among all civs lacking halbs, Italians are the only one to depend heavily on castle to counter cavalry.
2 Likes
I like the option, but I think this topic is properly pointing out the need for a feudal buff.
Making GC more viable would be possible just changing, for instance, the imp UT.
The idea of an archer (or a military) bonus fits better. Despite the weakness to cavalry is quite big, I feel the civ issue is much earlier…
1 Like
Something like making economic buildings (mill, lumber and mining camps, dock and market)
build 50% faster.
If you buff them through the imp UT, then what’s the point of complaining of a feudal buff? In imp GC are already viable.
My point is just that there are several ways to buff GC?
A feudal buff is way more important imo…
But this sentence:
Is the opposite of this:
If you want to buff the GC, but at the same time you think that they are the at weakest in the feudal age, then the most reasonable choice is a compromise of buffing the GC in the castle age, not to buff the GC though a imp UT…
I want to say that you can buff GC, in several ways. It is actually quite bad overall, considering also the upgrade cost.
Still this should have much less priority to other kinds of buffs, especially the feudal ones.
Another buff I thought, which may be discussed is something like -100w barracks. Minor, but definitely ok in feudal Arabia, less useful for several FCs builds and water
All buffs should be done to compete on Arabia, other maps should be completely disregarded, even if said buffs make the civ completely-broken-omega overpowered there.
It’s pretty simple: Arabia makes up for 3/4 of the 1v1 games, if a civ is weak there, it doesn’t matter if it’s strong somewhere else, because that “somewhere else” is hardly going to get played.
Is this bad? Obviously, but it’s the current state of the game, ignoring it it’s not going to work.
2 Likes
Viper said Italians are quite underrated.
1 Like
Because the Italians age up 15% cheaper, it would be best to avoid anything else (faster building, cheaper buildings) that would then make this overpowered. Certainly on maps with fish, their cheaper fishing ships further contribute to a fast up time.
Ironically, the Italians have access to all units and blacksmith through Castle Age, and only start showing weakness in Imp with a lack of Paladin, Halb, and heavy siege.
And yet their win rates shows that they are at their best in imp…
On the other side, they are at their weakest until middle castle age.
Yet, even on hybrid map, civs like huns and mongols age up way faster than Italians…
It’s true to some extent.
Italians are mostly difficult to use. But part of that problem is they are too much generic, but without any good well rounded bonus.
1 Like
In Imp they show their power, in my opinion: cheap gunpowder units, a fast and strong infantry (Condottiero), FU Hussar, Arbs with Pavise, elite Genoese Crosswbowmen, all University techs apart from SE.
In Castle age they have a good tech tree but absolute generic units, with no bonus except the faster ballistic. Pavise is an Imp tech because you do always the two armors from blacksmith before the more expensive Pavise.
Poor wording on my part. That sentence was referring to the Italian’s tech tree. I should have said “only start showing gaps in their tech tree in Imp with a lack of…”
Nope. Not in team games…
And not in late imp in individual 1650+ games…
Their problem isn’t in TG, never said that.
Yeah, how unfortunate that we haven’t all +1650 elo…
Also, 40 min are about early imp, so still imp.
I completely agree. That it why I am very favorable to a feudal buff. Even a military bonus, like faster archers or archers affected by some extra tech, is good since it impacts way less arena-like maps.
I would say that these are other two weaknesses (missing an anti-cavalry and missing a heavy siege unit). But to me the open tech tree can compensate this. What it cannot compensate is the weakness in the early stages.
1 Like
Italians dont need a buff. People need to learn to play better. Git gud. Have a plan
I find jack of all trades civs like Italians sometimes have lower win rate because people don’t commit to something like they would do to civs with a clear defined identity. Like Frank’s with cav or Britons with archers.
I lost a game with Japanese cuz I wasn’t sure what to get and I got a little bit of this and a little bit of that lmao.
People losing with Italians just formulate a plan and stick to it. Fast imp arb push into hussar support late game. You’ll win gogo
Its almost like if balancing the game around the pros is the most sensible thing to do.
Yea I agree that Italians need a proper play, but against a civ like Mayans or Britons, well you know what happens… as long as those keep overdominating, Italians won’t see the sunlight.
1 Like
Not really sure what is the best gameplan for Italians in Arabia.