Відео

They’re a really unique faction!

Never considered Halo’s role in pop culture. That’s a cool point!

Well said!

By Zeus best and greatest I swear it’s not true. No Persian has greased my palms with gold and silver for my treachery. No, I am merely a flawed youth with the revisionist tendencies that naturally occur in the young 😀

Eventually, I’ll do all the factions so stay tuned!

For Egypt, you can always go with a core of Jeudaen threospears. They are one of the best threospear units and will hold for a very long time in combat. As for buildings, you should priorize an agricultural economy with Egypt. Make sure to have a balance of farms and livestock buildings as the livestock buildings will give you much more income. Otherwise, whenever you have resources in a settlement, try to build the economic building specific to that resource since it will usually give you a great amount of income.

@Historica2000 thanks buddy, I can get the threo units until the reforms at turn 50 or so. I'll definitely aim for the agricultural builds though.

@ Ohhh, for early game, look at your mercenary pool. There are some cheaper units there for sure. You don't get great infantry options as Egypt until your reforms.

@@Historica2000 are mercs feasible to maintain financially? Must be drawback to them?

@@camy252camy3 Each mercenary unit has different upkeep costs, and most of the mercs Egypt has are worse than their pikemen, but they will also be cheaper. For example, Karian levies and Egyptian infantry are really cheap.

Thank you!!

Hey. You really should really Show the Units on the Battle map when doing the Overview. Thats half the fun

@@BobBuildmaster That's a reasonable suggestion!

Celtic sword masters are so good!

Thank you! I'm excited to keep on going with this series :)

That’s definitely true, and Massalia’s lack of pikes makes it a poor match against Rome once they get swordsman.

@@Historica2000 differently true, in my experience its the Greek faction, specifically the Diadochi and can punch Rome back, but only if they are controlled by humans. The AI incompetent at fighting Rome

I would put it in S tier for sure. Phenomenal combat record, stability, diplomacy, and reasonable longevity so far. None of these empires can provide the same level of quality of life either while existing for so long.

Awww, I’m so happy ya’ll are enjoying my videos :)

Sweet!

This is just a template I found online, but they definitely should be on the list! Strongest Islamic Empire in history!

Classic Naz lol

It’s impossible to make this kind of comparison a science so it’s obviously just a silly exercise 😂. I based the rankings off of longevity, cultural impact, and my perception of their fighting ability.

I do understand your point, but with the Axis you're basically comparing failed empires to actual empires that lasted hundreds of years. If this was a ww2 country tierlist, I would have them in S tier, but because this is an empire tier list, I feel that it is justified that they are on the bottom because they are both failed empires.

@@Historica2000 fair enough, though that raises the question of how long does an empire need to survive for it to count as a success. also at 8:20 who are you referring to? the Qin is generally what is pronounced as chin and they were not around in the 13th century, though you may be getting mixed up with the Jin and Xi-Xia which are pronounced differently and were around at the time

@@Crimsrn Yeah, I can't offer a firm answer on how long an empire needs to survive in order to be a success, however, I would suggest that an empire needs to last the entire lifespan of a generation to even be considered a success. Otherwise, an empire is clearly not stable enough. As for the Chinese empire I was referring to, the flag shown on screen has to be the flag of the Qing dynasty which was the last imperial dynasty of China. Their Wikipedia page has that flag clearly displayed: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Qing_dynasty

@@Historica2000 no you were referring to an empire under the mongol empire section outnumbering the mongols on horseback yet still losing, at around 8:20. this cannot be the qing, they did not exist until 1636. it's either got to be the Xi-Xia, Jin or Song, and none of which are pronounced as chin so i was confused

Oh my bad, I did not remember what I was talking about at that time stamp. Thanks for the correction! I am referring to the Jin, although, I have seen them spelt as Chin in some texts.

A compelling argument!

C tier for sure, longevity really hurts them

That is probably fair, although, where would you put Imperial Japan? Do you think they deserve a similar ranking or is D fair for them? They were definitely a far weaker army objectively.

By far the shortest lived empire on the list, and as I said, they have by far the most negative historical legacy on this list.

Hmmm, do you actually have an argument as to why the ranking is wrong though?

@junglegutten7019 the Nazi's may have had some good battle tactics and equipment, but they clearly bit off way more than they could chew with their overall strategy and ambitions, especially in the timeframe they attempted. Thus, their "reign" didn't last any time at all when you compare it to pretty much any empire on the list lol. So, no longevity, no positive cultural impact, and probably the most hated group of modern history... either you're outing yourself as a nazi simp, and/or you're delusional 😂

@Historica2000 Yeah forgive me I didn't wish to just dump a wall of text in the start. reasons to put Nazi Germany higher: Hitlers Germany compared to other ratings you gave such as Napoleon's French empire, USSR , Austria Hungary and so on eventually collapsed due to outside pressures and instability. You can not objectively argue that Nazi empire taking on the whole world often fighting 1:3 on each front and still taking entirety of mainland Europe was a failure. You called this video a "military history" and therefore states like Austria Hungary, Qin China should be below Germany due to none of them every taking down another empire or major state in a war. You even put Imperial Germany far above Nazi Germany which arguably did worse than Nazi Germany due to them failing to take down France and push any further in Russia than Nazi Germany did. not only that but Nazi Germany was demilitarized and had a way worse and weaker army to start off with and yet it still achieved more(arguably). Also remember that world war two was essentially the world against Germany and without Lend lease and constant pressure from countries outnumbering Germany in GDP and Manpower, Soviet's would have fallen. you can search up the amount of lend lease Soviet's got from The allies not to mention the strategic pressure Naval blockades, Naval landings and bombardment did on German Army 1. Your argument that Germany lost is valid and although most empires lose in the end Germany lost quite quickly and although it was in the modern era where empires collapse easily once a war is lost, I agree it shouldn't be higher than a B. 2. You rated French empire A which often is regarded as starting with Napoleon However Napoleon similarly to Nazi Germany eventually lost to the pressure of the whole known world at the time and his empire collapsed. 3. Austria Hungary being above is even sillier because they arguably weren't an empire because of military gains, they never won any major war without allies and got most of their empire not from military success but diplomacy. 4. USSR lasted longer than Nazi Germany I grant them that under Stalin and Lenin they had impressive land grabs, but after Stalin they had mostly at best status quo and more honestly constant defeats at hands of NATO which undermined the empire until it eventually collapsed in less than 80 years. Even China eventually felt like it was gonna overtake it.

Thank you for providing a detailed response. Honestly, I respect it a lot! I am pretty ignorant on Austrian history in general, so I did read up a little on the different conflicts that the Austrians were involved in where their empire expanded, and besides some impressive victories against the Ottomans, I couldn't really find anything else that goes against how you described Austro-Hungarian expansionism. As such, I'll gave to give you that one, although, the greater longevity of Austria-Hungary is still a consideration. Now, when it comes to the French Empire, Napoleon did win significantly more battles then the Nazis, and because I was considering the French Empire as a whole rather then any particular French regime (I know that's a little unfair but this is a stupid tier list after all lol), I still think it's pretty fair to put them considerably above the Nazis since they maintained colonial holdings across the world for centuries. Even if they lost battles, those battles did not undermine their ability to remain an empire while for the Nazis it definitely did. As for the Qing dynasty, the Qing were a small Manchurian minority ruling over all the other ethnicities in China, and this was known to all at the time. The Qing had very specific laws that gave Manchurians privileges above all other Chinese people. As such, I see the survival of the Qing dynasty as an empire of the Manchurians over China rather than a united China, although, the many loses the Qing had against foreigners during their decline is why they ranked poorly on the list. I hope this explanation makes sense, although, it's just a product of how I perceive the Qing dynasty. As for the Soviet Union, maybe I did rate it too high lol.

Thanks!

I don't know much about that conflict, but I did hear that Uruguay had exceptional leadership in that era that allowed them to hold out against far stronger countries!

​@@Historica2000I think you mean Paraguay, refering to the Triple Alliance war lol. But yeah, I think it was more because Paraguay having prussian doctrine and prepping up for war beforehand sure did help them a lot. The brazilian army was essentially just a bunch of barely organized militias before the war

Interesting and thanks for the correction lol. My knowledge about South America is extremely lacking :)

Dang, I missed the all time greats. A true shame!

That’s a good question😂. I found this tier list online, and I don’t think the original creator if the list consisted this question thoroughly. The only sinilarity between these nations is that they invaded and held some territories that were occupied by people outside of their culture. Don’t see any other parity between all the options.

My favourite factions: Pergamon Maurya Samraya Rome with Roman Legions submod.

Those are some cool choices!

I don't know why I can't play this faction in Grand Campaign. How can I make it playable?

You need to own the dlc

But can you really put an empire that existed for less than 100 years in the same rank with empires that existed for hundreds? Besides, WW2 was the only remarkable military victory the Soviets achieved in their entire history of existence. I'm not saying that it's an unimportant victory, but it's hard to rank them higher because of these two factors.

@@Historica2000 also y'know, they mostly won by sending their men into a meat grinder

If America and Britain never helped the soviets then they would have lost

Definitely true. The soviet airforce used lots of Allied planes and their logistics were completely dependent on allied trucks. There is no way the Soviets could have built up enough industry in the east to sustain their war effort alone. On the same side, the Soviets accelerated the collapse if Japan by destroying their Manchurian army.

Nope. As said above, the soviets mostly relied on allied support while also having an extremely large population to throw in the frontlines. Had german engineers simply stuck with reliable material instead of trying to innovate too much, it's very likely that Germany would have reached the Caucasus. The russian, then soviet and now russian army again was always a mess, due too poor leadership.

🇷🇸

You’re right! Can’t believe I missed that. Thank you so much!