Why do you want to buff europeans farther?

Grenadiers, sappers, merc/natives shipments and so on… Europeans (and this includes US/Mex) are the strongest by having the most effective artillery, a lot of economic cards and factories.


It’s the only civs they play.


Only one factory for Malta and Italy, and Maltese don’t get grenadiers, they get fire throwers. Now although fire throwers are still very good, the 50 wood can be hard to accumulate early on.


Nice, that are only 2 out of 13 western civs which doesnt explain geberal buffs for the whole cultural group.

Malta doesnt get a factory but gets huge wood crates in age IV, so there is no difference with other civs that lack factories at all.

Italy has a structural issue due to poorly implemented papal armies and microintensive lombards while malta suffers from pop heavy units and lack of stables

I would add that they are the vast majority of the game’s roster and learning to use one already allows you to play with the others, perhaps not at the level of a mein, but competently.

1 Like

This is part of why I want to rework the Natives. Nobody plays them outside meta strats that abuse their strong early, they are the favorites of extremely few people and are just bad designs in general.


Native are not bad design. They just got too much nerfs.
Weak eco, weak army, only early pressure, requires high skill. Like you pay more but get less.

Because inevitably more people are more familiar with Europeans of this period of time due to popular culture and education, so they can more easily spot the inaccurate or lacking parts and propose to change them.
If one sees a merc/native that has strong associations with a civ (based on their knowledge) not accessible to that civ, it is natural and straightforward to feel it should be done. This is such an easily conclusion that you do not need to go through the balancing or “cultural hegemony” mindset before coming to it. But some people’s brains are so distorted by the agenda of their great movement (on a forum with ~20 active people btw) that they can automatically bypass the normal logic.

There are also people who have some more knowledge of other civs, myself included, that point out where they need similar changes. I don’t see fierce oppositions or complaints about that every week.

But some people only see the pvppvppvp aspect. In fact most want something because. it is fun. It does not necessarily need to be a buff. Siege tower in AOE2 is almost useless in pvp but it is better than not having it.

While some other certain people rather than trying to broaden the discussion to all civs and enlighten the people prefers to prohibit it if it is mostly about Europeans.


because age of empires 3 is age of europe 3 now. with 2 more european civs coming.

1 Like

The silly tribal market contradicts this, among other things I’ve already mentioned in other threads.


1600w every 5 min or so is not a factory at all. See any treaty game ever to learn how shipments and res work. its not haude or aztec.boosting.xp, its not even close to 5w/s factory

As for the general feeling its euro centric due to favoring only euro civs thats not really true. China japan india morenpopular than half the civs. Least played civs in 1v1 are italy malta haude. Teams I dont have recent data it was pretty much even accross.civs.

The most popular civs are brits dutch otto france china, guess the demographics of aoe3 players then look it up. The whole power being a huge factor goes out the window when you realize russia, an extremely weak 1v1 civ and india nerfed right now both middle to upper middle in popularity. Agter that all civs tend to be middle of the road exepct dlc civs (not mexico or usa) and haude. And haudes a good civ.

Basically popularity does not equal design as much people want to complain about civs nerfs. That were almost always justified

edit- censor strikes again, microsofts blatant attempt to limit our ability to communicate in the name of shareholder profits continues to push society into a dystopian hellspace, may the engineer of such design suffer death by lamprey


This is by DE…
Sweden and Malta are also quite bad design euro civ to me.

1 Like

In general it is better than before, but there were such controversial changes that there are even many who did not even buy the game.

I think the Swedes are fine, and the Maltese have interesting units and concepts despite the fact that many of us say that it is not justified as a playable civilization, but my criticism is more focused on the fact that Lakota and Haudenosaune mining is a bad mechanic (opinion general).

Sweden breaks the formal aoe3 unit rule, no skirm and goon type and add merces later…
At the beginning carolean broke the game, than hakk broke the game, now pike and church halb rush is breaking the game. Happy torp tickle makes them the best eco in the game. This civ has never been balance since created.

Malta fixed gun is bad unit (not they are weak) in supremacy, copy most euro civ unique unit for them… Malta self unique units are quite useless…
Basically bow pike. What is the reason to create so much stuffs?

Wood shipments which could’ve been used to get good upgrades, or send more units

1 Like

Even the Russian supply of 1000 wood works, so I remove the vils from the forest. 1600 supply of malta is generally endless wood.