Longbowmen attack too close, Armor Clad is weak, Enclosures is low. There is where I think the English need to be improved, also that they are weak on late game, but strong rushing, maybe there should be some balance there.
English sees a bit of help in the next patch afaik. Just ask the testers.
I tested, it change nothing. It will just boost a bit the stupid longbow rush.
But isn’t that what English is good at?
You literally listed three English bonuses which are amongst the strongest in the game. They don’t need any buffs, they are doing just fine. They have been doing Longbow pushes ever since the game released and its still working. This shows how strong they are. And yet next patch they are getting huge earlygame buffs which will mean even faster towers next to your wood-line.
really? maybe on lower elo it still works, but take a look at mid and high elo.
The winrate speaks for himself.
english game at age3 still sucks even after the patch.
Nerfs/changes to other Civs is technically a buff, no? That is, if there are any changes that help English.
yea sure, the nerfs works so good for other civs.We can see on it on mongols or french
Last patches was always a indirect nerf for england. longbows vs horsemen for example…
and after the PUP Patch, I think Abbasid will be stronger then before, but we will see.
I know you’re being sarcastic, but look at it this way. Chinese is getting nerfed with this patch even though they are no no position to get nerfed. HRE, English, Abbasids are all getting buffs while Chinese keeps getting nerfed. All these Dynasty changes are long overdue but the devs are somehow trying to sell them as buffs when they are not. The villages are a nerf since everyone uses Song Dynasty. Yuan Dynasty is too expensive to be used in the vast majority of games and the IO nerfs and Granary nerfs weaken the civ. Just to stay even with other civs this patch, Chinese would need a buff, but they are getting nerfs.
before you come with china, take any elo above >1100 and look at the winning rates, you will see, chinese is always ahead.
your argument, chinese will nerfed too, makes it not better.
look at >1300
England has 44,4% winrate
your chinese 49,2%
mongols still 54,5%
and you wanna tell me, everything is fine?
You don’t balance a game by looking at low elo ladder statistics. You balance the game by looking at the peak peformance of each civs and compare it.
What we can gather from this is that currently Delhi is banned by everyone, its overpowered.
Abbasid has risen to the top thanks to 10 seconds faster Age up and Berry buffs (which also affect Delhi).
Mongols are still too powerful, the changes to Stone generation actually buffed them in Age 3 and Age 4, which is wrong. Steppe Redoubt has needed a nerf since release but its still not nerfed.
If you look at civ pick rates you can deduct information about what the pro player think what the strongest civilisation is. In N4C Chinese has been picked the least, has only been picked on specific maps and matchups. English has been a staple civ ever since release. There have been few balance changes for English and it has always been a fine civ.
Whats also important to think about: A civ is losing not because of its own performance, but because of the performance of another civ.
Let English play against Delhi and English winrate will look terrible, because Delhi is overpowered. Just look at the Ladder winrates for Delhi.
Now here we see a small sample size, but we can see an absurd winrate for Mongols with the highest game count. And we see Chinese with the lowest game count.
So while English has a lower winrate percentage wise, its being played nearly 3 times as much as Chinese! This indicates that not only in tournaments, also at the extremely competitive peak of the ladder, players are not playing Chinese because its not worth doing so. Instead, only the most die-hard players pick Chinese and still only manage to get sub 50% winrate. Why is English winrate so low? Well because they have to play against the strong civs of course. Mongols, Delhi, Abbasids.
So what is the conclusion? Don’t buff English. Don’t buff Abbasids. First of all, nerf Mongols, nerf Delhi. Get all civs closer together. You don’t do that by nerfing Chinese and buffing English.
Don’t randomly toss out gigantic buffs like they are doing for English. We saw what happened to Abbasids. We can fully expect the same happen for English.
Winrate is a useful metric, but some folks here rely on it as though it were the only metric. I’d recommend against that, especially with a large update coming up.
maybe, but this game isnt only for high elo players…
yea worked pretty well at the last patch or not? not
and if you wanna talk about high elo, take a look at the golden league qualifiers.
english winrate 26,4%
but yea dont buff english, no its not required.
In pup English have a nice boost for the start of the game. Mongols have a good nerf for field sieges due to a long setup for build… So we will see how it can change the win rate for English
It’s not the only thing.
I’m so aware about the English Rush strength, and that’s why I say balance, because it makes no sense that they are only good in the early game but nothing in the mid and late game, considering that as soon as the Welsh Longbow started to be used, it still took a long time to make it shine on the battlefield. Arrow volley is strong but isn’t available until IV, and it’s at that age where the wood starts to be lacking because it’s clearly limited, unlike food and gold. And that’s just one way of showing that the English are only good early in the game.
The French are a bit OP compared to the English and some other civilisations, still the English received more nerfs than the French.
We don’t get balance just nerfing, some civilisations will need buffs or nerfs. I talk about the English because in all statistics images the English is almost the lowest, and they just receive nerfs. At the end of the day the word is balance, if they only got nerfs the game becomes monotonous, and if they only got buffs it becomes chaotic.