Britain range too strong?

Age of Empires II: DE II - Discussion
#1

So I’m not suggesting Britains are too strong (though they are on the strong side)

I’m suggesting that Britains having Arbs with 5+6 range has some necessary downsides.

It’s so strong that it has to be compensated for by reducing the DPS, but still Britains are OP against civs which can’t overcome the range. And because of the DPS nerf (from lacking thumb-ring) any civ which can neutralise the range (eg with siege rams or high-PA units) can crush Britains.

The other downside is that longbows are a joke. They have insane range (12 when FU) but they only have 1 more range than Arbs do, and only in Imp. As a result they are rarely seen.

I do have an idea which might help, but I’d like to ask whether people agree or disagree with this analysis first.

6 Likes
#2

It’s OK to keep Britons longer range. Britons infantry is OK and archers is superior. But their cavalry archer, stable and siege are all bad. In other words, they can only rely on archers’ long range to be competitive. Their strategy is rather limited. Range can help resilience against siege.

BTW, I am still interested in your idea.

1 Like
#3

I wouldn’t say so, either. Although they are extremely strong they have exploitable weaknesses in feudal age and at some point in imp so I guess it’s fine. I just think their design is extremely lazy with their main military bonus, their UT and the UU all focus on giving archers more range.

I wouldn’t say they are a joke. They not only have one more range but also 1 more attack and the elite has one extra pierce armor. It’s actually a really good unit but since Briton gameplay is all about getting very large archer numbers and their xbows/arbs already are the best in the game you don’t see longbows that often outside of closed maps.

What’s your idea? I honestly don’t think that Britons will get fundamental changes because apparently so many people love them and they have been in the game for quite some time. Still, personally I wouldn’t mind a bit of a redesign. Like making the longbow another upgrade to arb which main feature would be the extra range while removing the +2 range in imp and maybe also the UT extra range. As a replacement they could get some infantry UU and a UT for that. Or something different, just not that boring extra range for everything.

1 Like
#4

Warwolf has a word to you…

4 Likes
#5

After the arbalester, add an upgrade that essentially becomes the next level of arbalester (removing the extra range of the arbalesters so it’s worth it) the fourth level being arbalesters become long bows and essentially unlocks longbows ability to become creatable from the archery range. Of course without the upgrade, may still create longbowmen in castles as per usual.

A buff to their knight line would be in order, remove cavalier and buff the knights stats to that of a generic fully upgraded palladin after upgrades, or somewhere close, with or without a special tech/civ bonus. Knights look cooler. At least that’s my childhood opinion and why I never liked upgrading them 11 they were more fun to roleplay with,

For example of a special tech: improved chainmail, which may or may not be a thing

It also seems more in line with britons being ‘knight’ heavy and is more fun to have imaginings with

#6

Britons are fine, they don’t have thumb ring and siege rams mess them up bad

#7

yes that’s my point.

Britons vs Celts/Mongols feels unfair and
Britons vs Berbers/Indians/Teutons feels unfair too

Though I guess it’s not as bad as T90 makes it sound

2 Likes
#8

It’s hard to balance one trick pony civs like Britons, they have to be strong at what they do

#9

i totally agree man, and for the majority of players (lower than 1650) britons (along with a few other civs) solidly dominate the meta, so would love to see either changes(like the LB becoming an upgrade of the arb and get a bilhook or some other UU)or simple nerfs, or buffs to the bottom guys to make them equally as viable for the majority of players…

@JonOli12 and others have mentioned some varieties of medieval infantry we dont see, and maybe one of them could become a GB UU instead (in a dreamworld of course, since GB will never get such a big change)

#10

i think others have pointed out that a lot of the AOK civs are like that, goths and franks with their one trick ponies too…

#11

despite siege rams messing them up and them having some bad match-ups, they are still one of the best civs in the game. they dont need buffs or nerfs.

2 Likes
#12

I’d love to see the britons gain a one time hero unit that comes fully upgraded and useable only once, being king arthur, with his holy sword excalibur, and being about as strong as a teutonic knight yet swift as a celt champion
Oh the roleplay, of course a side hero in the stables as well, being lancelot, on his horse with similar, yet weaker, stats - beyond that, idk, either way, useable only once and set at a premium, making lancelot the only cavalier in the civ would be a cool aesthetic

Oh and morgiana, merlin being special monks and mordred something akin or other

Ohhh the roleplay

Makes me want to watch the show merlin again

Anyone up to making a gamemode where all of the civs come with lore/fantasy appropriate hero units with a balanced approach?

#13

Oh Boy, you only read the title. Not even the 1st sentence of the OP.

3 Likes
#14

actually i read it all, i just disagree about needing to change Britons, completely. every civ will have good and bad matchups. should we change the entire design of the game because some civs struggle too much against others?

that will lead to further homogenization of the game and its units.

#15

Sorry I misunderstood what you were saying because of the words “buff” and “nerf”. It sounded like you were saying “Britons don’t need to be nerfed” rather than “Britons shouldn’t be changed”.

I am also against homogenisation, and against changes which destroy civ identities.

3 Likes
#16

Agree. Longbows should show their value but they are rare to be the main force.

Some changes below I think for Britons.

  1. Add the thumb ring and maybe the bloodline.
  2. Change the bonus of adding +2 range to foot archer into a new one that the villagers build the castle faster (maybe by 50% or 80%).
  3. Give +1 basic range to the longbows and +2 to the elite, keeping the full-upgraded range in 12 totally.
  4. Then, maintain Yeomen effect and maybe make it a little bit cheaper. The full-upgraded British arbs have 9 ranges and the thumb ring, still longer and better than the common one.
#17

Well, for me, part of the OPness of brittons come from the fact that their sheep bonus and their 50% wood discounted tcs allows them to FC fairly easily into 3tc boom while making archers in the meantime.

#18

Totally agree. The Britons with their +3 range are totally insane, they need nerf for sure.

1 Like
#19

Thumb Ringless archers alone balances them man…

LMAO is this a new trend?, complaining about things that existed since AOK :unamused:

Why not go back to AOE1 and complain of the extra range of Minoan Composite Bowmans

#20

Honestly I suspect part of their popularity (also works for Franks) is due to them being the cliche medieval civ for a game that was first and foremost made for occidental people. The other reason being that there are more people who want an easy game plan than those who want variety.

Fun fact: I wondered how well they perform in those low elo games where longbows supposedely stomp everything and while they are overpicked they aren’t performing that well (https://aoestats.io/stats/RM_1v1/<1000) I know stats aren’t the decider but still, they were like that 2 months ago iirc and that’s shockingly lower than what their reputation would let you think.

Ensemble made a special map where everyone starts with a Robin Hood, a Friar Tuk and a hunting wolf. Now let’s make something balanced: 7v1 mode, where the team of one is an Ethiopian player with Abraha eles + Dagnajans 11

1 Like