Will Italy one day stop being the worst treaty civilization?

taly is by far the worst of the civilizations in the treaty, its economy and its army are weak. However, she was hoping that they would give them small buffs in this one so that at least the civilization would be viable.
The imperial improvement seemed that Pavisier was a very useful unit, however with the current changes to these I think they will not represent a great advantage now.
I think that the decrease in the arrival time of the papal units is positive, but they are still in the same queue as the shipments, so their entry mechanics are still very complicated for this modality. Seeing as this bonus has a clear intention from the devs on how they want to address the problem, I think these units should have a shipping queue separate from normal shipping to make them viable. I know this is not a problem in supremacy but in treaty it makes these units practically useless because to train them you constantly have to sacrifice shipping.
On the other hand, the nerf to the halberdier through Roman tactics means that Italy continues to have a very precarious anti-cavalry, its musketeers are incredibly bad and although its dragons are a little better, it is necessary to have a 1 pop unit that is not exclusively melee to that Italy can adequately face the cavalry.
On the other hand, the civilization continues to suffer from the worst heavy artillery, the papal bombards are terribly slow, have an ROF of 7 and cost 8 population, which is not justified, it must also be mentioned that in this modality their ability makes them attract shots from the culbrins, this unit with these stats should be 7 pop and have at least a speed comparable to the Ottoman bombard.
The bersaglieri is an expensive skirm and dies very easily against other skirmishers. I think that if Red shirts (garibaldini) increased 15% HP in the imperial age to units with rifles, it would significantly improve the performance of the Italian army.
Finally, its economy is bad. 1 factory without economic theory and terribly microintensive due to the Lombards make Italy end up draining coins very quickly, this due to the high cost of the skirm and the halberdiers that are its main composition of the army.
Honestly, I am convinced that the devs are focused on keeping this civ insufferable, which is a shame since many players have waited up to 14 years to play it.


Italy may not be the stronger of the civs on Treaty, but they are not the weakest. That honor position coresponds to Aztecs, in my opinion.
However, like someone in the forum said one time, Italy really has >2 factories. The first one is the traditional. The second+ is in the Lombards with Ufizzi card.
Bersagliere, Carabinieri Dragoons, Papal Lancers, Papal Zouaves and Culverins are good. (Bersaglieri could be better, but is what we have). I use the Mediterranean Mercenaries card sometimes, they are my Heavy Artillery. Papal Lancers eat skirmishers and can fight against halberdiers.
Yes, Italy have problems, but is not unplayable. They are fun, I’d think


the Lombards don’t compensate for the absence of a second factory.


Sounds like skill issue to me.

Just use mercs lmao

1 Like

Concerning the Pavisier I agree. The changes are an incomprehensible nerf.
I would like us to return to a healthy base of balancing the Pavisier by ceasing to scatter the adjustments whether in regards to the cards, the politicians, the improvements in rank or the raw statistics of the unit.

It seems to me that by adjusting the unit, the developers forgot what made it its identity.

The pavisier is not destined to do great damage. With his large shield and his different formations that give him differents statistics, he must obtain a very good resistance to ranged or melee damage depending on the chosen formation. This is why nerfing 5% ranged resistance thus obtaining 30% equivalent to the resistance of skirmish type units is a very bad choice, not only for balancing, but for his identity.
The Pavisier should be a unit reaching 40% resistance with low hit points (around 250 full upgrades). His attack shouldn’t go over 35 points and his range of 19 would be just fine with the weapon they’re using.
The player must therefore use the right formation according to the battle situations so that the unit is effective at the risk of losing it stupidly on a cavalry charge while it is still in volley mode. Because the Pavisier has low hit points, but a large shield, the choice of his formation must be crucial on the battlefield.

So to sum it up, 4th age with full upgrade (except the card romans tactics), the Pavisier with something like 250 health, 40% resistance, 32 attack, 19 range seems like an interesting balance to me (the imperial upgrade removed).
If it is well managed on the battlefield, it would make it an interesting tank and versatile unit in treaty and supremacy mode.

Even if you don’t agree with the proposed balancing, the important thing is to say here that the identity of the Pavisier should not be omitted in his adjustments.

1 Like

I would balance the pavisiers and other archaic units this way:

Roman Tactics:

  • Pavisiers HP nerfed from +30% :arrow_right: +15% on pair with halberdiers and pikemen.
  • Attack nerfed from +15/25% :arrow_right: +10% for all 3 units, but it also require less units to reach it’s cap.
  • It no longer provide any kind of stats improvement in age 5.

Heavy Paveses:

  • Resistance nerfed from +15% :arrow_right: +10%
  • The card now affects halberdiers and pikemen too giving them both extra HP and resistance.


  • Starting HP remain 120.
  • Guard and imperial upgrades doesn’t provide +1 range.

The unit would have 240HP/26atk in age 4, and 300HP/34atk in age 5, with 30% resistances and 19 range in all ages.

The halbs would instead have 360HP/43atk in age 4, and 460HP/57atk in age 5, with 30% melee resistance (60% ranged resistance in cover mode).
The same proportional stats for pikemen.

Here are the present pavisier and halberdier stats for the Italians:

As you can see, the pavisier would be in line with a malta xbow for attack, but tankier (justifying it’s higher wood cost)*.

The halberdier instead would have the same HP of the dutch ones, but it would trade base attack for more resistance, and it would still lack the speed buff, which is what makes the dutch halbs good.

Remember also that the attack buff provided by roman tactics needs a constant influx of fresh troops, otherwise the more losses you have, the less attack your units will have.

If the pavisier are still too strong, then I would consider nerfing the HP to 115, but by also reducing the cost a bit, like -5 food.


I love the new pavisiers skins, the age 2 one seems a medioeval soldier, the veteran pavisier a venetian or genoese marine, and the guard pavisier a royal guard of the pope or doge.
I especially love the morion and partisan polearm, I suggested a similar skin for a potential italian halberdier royal guard, but I love on the pavisiers.


Papal units now arrive in 28.2 seconds though with papal arsenal, which is faster than a standard shipment, and they have merc level stats (although they aren’t affected by the mercenary contractor).

I would try them out first to see how this would change, and then think of new changes around it.

Papal bombards are slow but at least the other 2 royal guard artillery received some buffs (and cool skins…).


Italy isn’t the best civ for treaty but they are definitely not the weakest. There are several civs worse then Italy on treaty. Haud and Aztec or Inca, imo Italy is better then Malta on treaty or least comparable.

1 Like

They could buff papal bombards a bit or increase their production rate
I say again both KOM civilizations need 2nd factory :factory: :factory:
I also think Italy needs at least one artillery card because both of its royal guard units are artillery


Hauds are really busted now, but they are difficult to use. Inca aren’t bad.


There are many civilisations that don’t have any factory. What are you crying about your civ has one?

1 Like

You just lying. Inca is bad. We can debate if italy is bad or not. But inca is just bad no debate

1 Like

if they’re going to make haud completely dependent on wood, they s should give them an infinite wood source for treaty.

1 Like

Treaty maps have extensive forest (x5 for hauds) and they have infinite crates. This ones is not the best cause it sends food and coins too but somehow people was able to play them on TAD where this forests didnt exist.

In other comments earlier to the forest adiition I aimed for removing food from the crates and keep them with higher amount of coin and wood to keep the gimmick.


Is sad that they dont fix italy at treaty.italy at treaty must have papal units train from barracks

1 Like

Inca is not very good for treaty not the worst but I don’t use them. I have played them on treaty and done ok but that was awhile ago.

1 Like

For me the worst thing about the Papal Bombards is their population cost. They cost 8 pop like Li’l Bombards but attack slower. Great Bombards use 6 pop with the “Topçu Corps” tech. Sending units from the Basilica already makes the population cost of units clumsier.

Maybe Papal Bombards could use 7 pop by default, and with the “Papal Arsenal” card use -1 pop, or at least have the “Papal Arsenal” card reduce its pop to 7, and maybe that way the people use and appreciate them more.


This is the comparison of the still official pavisier and halberdier *(red)*for Italians, and the ones in the current pup (blue) for age 4 and 5:

Pavisiers in age 4 gained a very small amount of HP, which doesn’t compensate at all the 5% resistance lost. it does receive a decent amount of extra attack, but overall I believe that this is a slightly nerf to the unit.

The imperial one is straight buff thought, so they should be a decent unit in the late game, but onestly I believe that italians still have better options.

Strangely enough, they don’t receive the +1 range from the veteran upgrade, but they receive it from the imperial one, but that’s probably a bug.

For the halberdiers it’s a straight nerf… italy halbs became famous for being the second best of the game, while still be a niche unit since they are slow. Now it’s I don’t see a lot of reasons to use them.

Maybe they never intended to give Italy good halbs as they have papal guards, but going full halbs was still a fun way, and the unit had that power and strength that no other I italian unit had, I just hope that they give them something else, to either them or to the papal guards.

As papal lancers and zouaves are now more specialized, papal guards are more generic, but I would like to see some changes to them, maybe a small increase to the base speed, or having the bodyguard effect applied to artillery as well.


Papal units must be at barracks.end nothing else only something like that italy be more good


with those stats pavasier doesn’t seems a big advantage for italy.