I partially agree. A lot of the points mentioned above will obviously not work against same skill players / higher skill players.
But, Valdemar showed on his Sunday stream a similiar approach and it was quite smooth (of course on a higher level). On Conq 7+ level I think English is strong, but it may not be that type of “op strong”. Unfortunately, AoE4 world data extracation doesn’t allow to see it.
Someone may need to access database in order check 2000+ elo data.
You would also need to account for:
matchup data (are there just some good matchups or is it “too much”)
account for elo difference and elo “inflation” (even 2000+ elo tend to dotch top tournament players on ladder sometimes, Thus their elo might be slightly inflated)
account for maps (are there too many maps played where English is op strong)
and so on…
The easiest way is probably to check which civs are most banned in tournaments. Though there is the issue of mappool as well.
Yeah, you preferably need a strong late game civ aka China, Abba… or a very good timing civ like Ayyu.
That is their civ bonus, sure a nice bonus on farms but other civs have better like rus with hunting cabin gold and +20% wood drop off and +15% food gather rate. China with granaries, tax, pagodas, abbasid with +15% on everything not just food straight away in feudal also with cheaper vills and cheaper farms should you go eco wing to castle.
All english have is the farm gather rate and enclosures in imperial and you’re not keeping up with late game siege, getting techs and spamming maa just from enclosures.
It didn’t escape me that you’re attempting to pivot from the relevancy of your excerpt?
What bonuses other civs have and how they stack up vs English bonuses, is moot. What is relevant is this civ, English, Has 5 highly synergistic bonuses that allows it to sit in its bases and grow exponentially (cheap farms, exceptional gathering rate, TC that fires double shots, network of castles, and keep landmarks that can also produce all units). All these bonuses and more, makes this civ crazy defensive and late one of THE most powerful civs.
Another thing that baffles me is how quickly you ppl wanna white wash the statistics??? I know statistics are not perfect, nor do they tell the full story but the statistics aren’t utterly useless nor, IMO, should be completely negated by mere conjecture:
… ppl dont know how to play, sure, but they make 1 update and all of a sudden ppl are learning to play??
Its like this people watching pros and copying it,if that tactic dont works they dont know what to do and lose.Now there is a new tactic people will figure out to counter it and normal people will fail ######### #### buff might be too op they can add a cost to king and make it created little bit slower.
France are far from good in 1v1 they need a buff to their trade landmark and perhaps something else that won’t effect their strength too much in team where they are a top civ.
The issue with the King is that it forces 1 barrack plus 2-3 spears in base to defend. It just puts you too much behind to realistically contest the 2nd TC or the FC.
I don’t think English are OP for the pros. But I think they are wrecking the gold/platinum/diamond leagues - which are kind of important for keeping an active playerbase.
The thing is, I don’t even think the English build (King->2TC->White Tower etc) is that “good”. Its that it gives your opponent so many ways to throw the game.
I.E.
They fail to deal with the king, who picks off an ever growing number of villagers ->gg.
They deal with the king, and then try and rush. But they fail to do enough damage and just lose to 2 TC villager numbers ->gg. Spearmen are bad for being aggressive generally - and horrendous into an English base.
Both players get to castle. But the non-English player makes a reasonable number of feudal units. Unfortunately they do nothing to unkillable 6/6 armour chad at arms, who can then swamp the smaller number of crossbows. The English player then just keeps pumping as their farm eco is now online ->gg.
Both players fight normally. But foolishly take a fight while the English player has NOC and lose heavily ->gg.
Both players go to Imperial, and the non-English player makes a bunch of fully upgraded crossbows. They can certainly kill MAA. But they didn’t completely stone wall up their base. Now pockets of MAA are just running into their economy, into the farms and woodlines. They are functionally free for the English player and again, won’t die quickly to anything except crossbowmen/handgunners (or certain faction unique units). Their eco is in shambles and gets swamped by the next wave ->gg.
None of this feels Ayyubid level overpowered. But its very “easy”. I don’t think anyone thinks the English player “played well” to achieve any of these wins. Its also not the king thats overpowered. Or cheap/boosted farms and Armour Clad MAA which has been in the game from the start. Its the combination of all these elements. There’s no point where the English player feels especially weak. (Maybe FC->Knights, but scout, barracks, a few spears and that’s solved.)
It’s not it is second highest and only at conqueror level not overall, overall win rate is 49.8%.
A better question is why are you so fixated on english which isn’t even strongest at conqueror instead of asking for ayyubid nerfs which not only is the strongest civ at conq with 53.7% win rate but also across all ranks has a 54.6% win rate compared to english at below 50%.
Ayyubid is clearly too strong a civ across the board, english isn’t even a problem so a better idea instead of whining about english is to ask for ayyubid nerfs particularly with the 8 villager eco wing.
In my opinion, people are too fixated on the idea of win rates and win rates alone.
On top of that, nerfing everything down will lead to a less enjoyable game. Buffing the underperforming civs will have an impact on the stronger civ’s performances without hurting their current style of play.
Well, it’s a unique unit…with a couple of spearmen you can take it down…
Things as they are…JD is stronger than the English…
Yes, I agree…before the players made fun of the “Abbey of memes” and now they complain, who understands them?..in fact I would give one more UU to the English…
Well the English and French were also always turtle civs in the saga…It’s normal that they were strong civs…
That’s a good one…like the Shoguns of AoE 3…
True, in any case buff the economy of the French and give them one more UU…
Yes, the English and French were always the easy civs for people to learn to play the games…
In my case I use King Palace and Wynguard Palace…
Ah interesting…yes, it’s quite a topic…
Yes, that’s true…if you’re going to make turtle, don’t consume the entire map in the process…
That’s true… Ayyubids are super flexible…
Yes, they never learn on their own, right?..don’t watch videos and experience it for themselves…
Anyway, one thing does not take away the other…if we ask to balance a particular civ, let’s balance them all…
Yes, in an asymmetric game it is normal that many things are not completely balanced, but that does not mean that you have to sacrifice fun, in order to want to balance everything for the competitive…this year another DLC will be released with 6 new civs and variants and again you will have to balance the game…in my opinion the variant civs are a bit strong and the HRE is very poor to play compared to the rest of the civs…
By the way this is a good point when the weak civs get buff strong civs shouldnt get nerfed because this way its harder to balance,either one should buffed or nerfed is enough i think.English king balance is so easy just add 150 gold or food cost to king and make abbey of kings landmark to produce wynguard units if the age4 wynguard castle landmark built.
3 spears counter the king but to produce these 3 spears (240 resources) you need to make also a barrack (150w) making a total of 390 resources to just defend from a free unit.
I can understand why people complain, in fact the king puts pressure and it’s enough to the english player put a second TC and get to castle with the white tower.
At this point he will be on 2TC and with a free keep who can also produce all units half the time (2 free workshops).
This goes on forever though. To get the King you build a Landmark. Anyone can theorycraft BOs based on comparing numbers. It’s easy to make the good parts of a civ seem good in isolation.
You want the King to be impactful. You don’t want it not to be because it’s half the reason you build the Landmark.
Who’s not building a Barracks? Who’s not building a Landmark?
Comparing a free unit to units that cost resources is always going to seem unfair. But at the same time you’re not doing a fair comparison. Who is the other civ? What’s their BO? What are their UUs? How much easier or harder do they handle the King?
“free stuff is strong” is a tautology. I’m not saying English don’t need nerfs, but not the way you’re approaching it. You’re not going to get the right answer that way.
If you read again my message, I’m not saying make the king impactness. But, 1 free unit who can safely get you to 2TC and a free castle on age up?
Even more the free castle can produce siege as 2 siege workshops, whose costs 700w.
I think the nerfs maybe could be to these safe path to boom, getting a free castle and 2 workshops. I think white tower maybe need to produce as 1 workshop or 1/2 or 3/4 of a workshop.
