You just get less food in age 1. By age 2 you will recover the bonus.
CM isn’t the only way ports can turtle. I’m also not suggesting a full on nerf, just make it more expensive on 2nd call, from 150/150 to 200/200.
1 Like
10/10 is referring to Portugal’s fast Age 2. In accordance to standard nomenclature in RTS, 10/10 refers to supply used/ total supply. 10/10 therefore means starting Age 2 with only 10 villagers, which is incredibly fast, faster than most other civs.
The reason this strategy is so overpowered is because it allows Portugal to get their 2nd TC up quick and safely, gaining lots of mapcontrol and map vision. And together with Colonial Militia and their special colonial militia units, Portugal is way too save against early aggression. Obviously having 2x the villager production aswell as increased base food gather rate, this makes for an unstoppable economy which gets rolling faster than any other civ and is still very safe against most civs. Which is why it dominates the game and is extremely oppressive.
3 Likes
Only IF there is a trading line with 4 or more TPs on it. Otherwise that agression is impossible to actually pull off - Since there are very few maps where this is actually viable i dont see why is this being nerfed.
The Water Boom is an FF not early agression and its a turtle strat that with CM forces MOST (but not all) civs to age up as well. The problem is that most players stick to a build and do not adapt, so they expect that their Musk or Lb spam in age II will win the game regardless of the opponents strat.
1 Like
If brit got nerfed, it’s the worst thing they ever could do to balance that game.
That civ is untouched since 2005, and I’ve never heard anyone complain about it. Why would you even think of changing something people are used to for 16 years ?
1 Like
I dont think that is true (i have the feeling manors and crates were adjusted). But its besides the point. Brits are one of the best civs and clearly op both in land and in water due to their manor boom. Most people dont complain because its also one of the most played civs in the game (if not the most).
I dont play brits but a slight nerf to their boom would be okay (however there are MANY other things that have priority to nerf over brits).
No idea why there are still people arguing against Port nerf. Anyone who has been watching the recent tournaments know that Sweden, Port, Spain are the strongest civ by a large margin at the moment. Sweden has been an issue ever since its release. There have been so many different issues and its been so overpowered that players still keep finding ways to make it overpowered even as some parts get nerfed one by one.
Or you know just ask the pro players. The tournament is over now and unexpectedly Spain, Ports, Sweden was abused as much as possible.
If we search Sweden in this forum, there are dozens topics complained since game released. So what do we get.
I am just stating that Ports are OP only in some maps. Ports are bad in any maps that dont have a TP line with 4 slots or maps that dont have at least 4 whales, (like great plains, gran chaco, pampas sierras etc.) which are the majority of the competitive maps.
1 Like
So what you are saying is:
-
1 free TC every Age up
-
100 exp from building said TC every Age up
-
1 extra starting villager thats working the entire game and scales with upgrades
-
increased base food gather rate which gets even stronger as you increase food gather rate
-
cheap Skirmishers costing more food than coin with 4.50 speed
-
strong musketeer, skirmisher upgrades and dragoon upgrades
-
buffs like spice trade, eco theory etc being even stronger given their increased base food gather rate
This makes a bad civ? You must be joking.
Portugal got a massive buff with their +100 exp from building the TC, which boosts their shipment curve and allows for even more tempo or economy shipments. Ontop of you have CM and if you manage to secure the middle of the map with your TC’s, you secure yourself multiple hunts. You also have huge map vision unlike your opponent. Yes the maps are good for Portugal, but ever since the recent buffs Portugal has been vastly overperforming. It only took some time for players to figure out builds and timings.
5 Likes
Grow up, there doesnt have to be a big patch every month. They are working on the Africa dlc, so they wont have much time for patches. Small patches are fine for now.
4 Likes
That playerbase dropped imeadialty because a lot of players were Age II players seeing what changed and people who were not really impressed with the buggy mess from the start.
1 Like
If I remind well, brit was the euro civ with the LOWEST ratio win/defeat on EP, with something like 40% wins only.
So I have to desagree. + every civ is good if you let it boom. The brit housing only start to pay after 7 minutes. Most rush can get unit out at 5min15 or 5.30. So if you see brit tp and you don’t push, it’s like letting dutch nake FF 5 banks…
2 Likes
Not really, or at least some are better than others, brit are one of the best but still not the same tier as japan or probably same tier as dutch or Sweden.
Not true, form the start of the game brit housing is strong because you essentially start wit two extra villagers, allowing manors to boost both your early start and your boom.
Including the British one, think of it like this, they either go tp and have to gather 35 wood where an average civ with tp start has to gather 100, and they get 1 extra villager age 1, or they don’t go tp and get two extra villagers age 1 allowing faster age up times, the tp start still allows you to get 1 extra villager age 1 so you still get an early lead over most civs.
Even though brits don’t get as big as an economy as Dutch, the British economy starts much sooner, 700x5= 3500, 87x20= 1740, so no, this is not comparable to Dutch in terms of speed, even if we consider the 200 wood brit spends on a tp, it’s still much cheaper than 5 banks, 5 bank is roughly 25 villagers to 20 from brit so it’s hard to say the Dutch banks are more cost efficient also.
Thing is, we cannot really take the Global Championship as a definitive rule for this, because there are predefined maps that are not included in the game pool.
For example, one of the reasons that Swedes were picked so much as a first choice is because the first map is Fraser River, which is a custom map that is not in the actual game, that happens to be super good for Swedes because of the large amount of gold mines scattered around the maps.
A good example of this it would be if the first map was Texas, a lot of the players would have picked Russia, since they are super good on Texas because you already starts with 2 blockhouses.
This does not means that the civilization itself is broken, its just so happens that they are super good on the predefined map that was on the tournament.
Also just to be clear: I do think that Swedes do overperform other civilizations, I just sincerely don’t know the reason why.
Spanish Logistician needs a nerf and Portuguese colonial militia also needs a nerf.
I just don’t think we should use the Global Championship as a definitive proof of what needs to be changed.
People really need to just learn to play better and stop whining for nerfs because they lost to a civ recently
5 Likes
A can get 2/sec gold trickle and B can get 0.1/sec food trickle.
In case B lose a game, B need to just learn to play better.
1 Like
What about the Aztecs they with Russia are the worst of the game.
2 Likes
Have you ever been rushed by eagle runner knights?..
1 Like
eu acho que o jogo vai receber atualizações até junho do ano que vem e não terá mais
They are the worst Civ of the game because they have 0 boom options for age 2/3. Warrior priests take forever to spawn and they are not completed until 15-20 min of game, so Aztec get surpassed very easy in economy.
In late game their lack of artillery is the biggest weakness, arrow knights are so slow, weak and poorly cost effective. Not to mention they are 2 pop for no reason.
Coyotes are almost useless in late game, they die very easy vs skirmisher + cannon, units they suppose to counter!!!
2 Likes