What do you mean “OTT” ??? Please explain further …
I would change the current Highlanders to fit into British armies.
The Highlanders you see in game, despite being a Merc, are depicting standard Highlander soldiers in the British army. The whole notion of Mercenary ones and not actually being a standard British unit (England + Scotland being in union for very long time in the AoE3 timeline!) is always a little jaring, consider long almost all games that feature them do it correctly - with the British civ (Cossacks 1,2 and 3, Total War, Rise of Nations, to name a few).
What do I suggest? This:
British unique unit:
Highlander
Graphically the exact model. On the stat side, it has a really great melee and melee resist. Compared to a Redcoat Musketeer or even a standard Musketeer it has less ranged attack, similar health and still costs 2 pop despite not being a Merc (abstractly representing that they weren’t as populous as the standard British regulars), however once locked into melee, they are much better than standard musketeers due to their melee attack and resist.
Pros
- Very strong melee
- Higher than normal melee resist
In the middle:
- Similar health to standard Musketeer (non-Royal Guard)
Cons
- Worse ranged attack compared to Musketeer
- Takes 2 pop - meaning the standard Redcoat is more pop efficient unless you want to engage into melee more.
What happens to the current Mercenary Highlander?
He becomes the…
Redshanks
Armed with a Claymore Broadsword (not the big 2 hander one!), Targeteer (small round shield) and Musket. These Highlanders were first and foremost mercenaries. Used in Ireland as well as mainland Europe, Redshanks would fire their muskets (originally a short bow) and charge in with sword and shield. You can call them Scottish Targeteers if you really want, however Redshanks were their name.
What changes? Just the unit model - if anything it’s more traditional Highlander garb than the current British Highlander regiment style! Graphically he would be wielding his sword and board or musket depending on stance with the currently unused weapon sheathed at the side or on his back (musket). Flintlock pistol can also work instead of the Musket
If you really wanted to be fancy, you could give the Merc ‘Highland Charge’ which functions like the Carolean Charge except for maybe a temporary ranged resist.
Stat-wise - exactly the same as the current Merc Highlander!
Ultimately we are then left with the same Mercenary we know and love - just a little more non-British army looking plus actually far more authentic (these Scots Merc found there way into other European armies NOT in British attire!). We also gain a melee specialist musketeer for the Brits which for the negative of 2 pop spaces we can a tough guy for close combat, arguably all patching up that place other Euros fill with a Halberdier slot.
Also it means potential Jacobite scenarios/campaigns/mods get some more-fitting non-British army units.
3 Likes
I like this idea but let me present the stats I’d give them…
British Highlander (unlocked in barracks in Age 3 which automatically gives them veteran status. Stats shown below are before the vet upgrade)
- Hitpoints: 300
- Melee resist: 40%
- Cost: 130 food 50 coin
- Population space: 2
- Movement speed: 4.5
- Range attack: 30 (with an area-of effect of 1, with a range of 10 and rate-of-fire of 3)
- Melee attack: 35 (with an area-of effect of 2, a x2 multiplier against cavalry and shock infantry and a 1.5 rate-of-fire)
- Siege attack: 45 (with a range of 8)
@SirBarnzy1 what do you think of my suggested stats??
Sounds like a perfect replacement.
Just an addition that sp replayability is also part of sp content. Because however many campaigns they add you’ll eventually consume all of them.
For skirmishes vs AI I have incentives to play US, Mexicans, even new French and Germans, several times because there are quite a few new fun stuff (which will get severely punished in pvp) to play with. For British I don’t even have any motivation to play in skirmish once in a week because I can fully expect how I’ll be using it. Manor musket longbow hussar manor musket longbow hussar. Interesting units? None. Meme strategies? None. Historical reenactment? Little. Navy? THE most standardized. Big battles in the late game? Still the same old stuff. Revolution? Congratulations you also have some of the most boring ones.
I’d say Spanish and French are the “core” “learn to play” civ of the game. They have all unit types, standard economy, straightforward bonus. Look how many new stuff they are given since DE.
1 Like
I think this would be best achieved with different age-up politicians.
Cavalier/Jacobite - Improves archaic units and gives access to Scottish and Irish units
Roundhead/Whig - Gives access to pilgrims and new techs
Viceroy of India - Gives access to units like Gurkahs and Sepoys
A few other minor changes like replacing Falconets with Sakers and just enabling Rangers by default in age 4 would also be welcome.
1 Like
Perhaps let the 2 factories can be shipped by just 1 card rather than 2 cards. May be this card can be named “Industrial Revolution”.
1 Like
These ideas range from interesting and novel to completely ridiculous.
The British really don’t need this much of a rework. They’re already a solid civ.
I’m in favor of adding more Merc interaction but that’s true for all civs, the Brits don’t need special access to highlanders. They also have the strongest hussar and dragoon in the game that civs have regular access to (port goons oy have +range but otherwise identical). They’re the best livestock civ in the game. They have a small but solid roster of infantry (redcoat is the best generic musk, rangers are solid. Longbows are powerful dps.) They’d benefit from a grenadier rework since they’re meant to have the best grenadiers in the game, imo.
2 Likes
I think at least the Black Watchs can be trainable at Tavern after “The Black Watch” gets researched at Church.
This way can be acceptable.
Then, maybe a card named “British Raj” can ship a group of Indian units and allow them to be trainrable at Tavern, especially when the Gurkhas and the Rajputs can become the mercenary unit instead of the regular units of Indians.
That’s can be enough.
5 Likes
Swedes have among the best musketeer yet they can also amass stronger merc musketeers. By design they should only have access to merc skirmishers and dragoons as a complementary.
So it wouldn’t be a problem for other civs.
2 Likes
They are a solid civ but also a bit generic and predictable. I’d like to clarify that I don’t think that “only” the British civ needs a rework. I really think that the Portuguese and Russian civs both need similar in-depth re-works. I also feel that there is still missing content in the French, German and Dutch civs too, despite their recent updates. I’ve just always mained Brits and civs with a similar play style (Sweds and Japanese) so that’s why I feel more keen to present ideas about a British civ makeover than any other of the vanilla civs. (I’m actually British as well so that probably also biases my opinion too 
). This page is for ALL ideas around this topic, and I’ll slowly filter out the less feasible ones later.
1 Like
I can get behind black watch doing that. I’d like to see every civ get a guaranteed selection of at least 1 - 2 mercs that historically match up. Germans and swedes should probably get the most followed by the dutch.
2 Likes
Oh man it is not rework it is just buff. Why do you want to make british op?
they have 1, its called cowing.
which is required to play british well in treaty.
british lategame eco is essentially around 140 vills because of cowing.
I like them though I’d probably make these changes:
• Pop cost: 2
• Cost: 100 Food 20 Gold
• Hitpoints: 200
• Speed: 4.25
• Resist: 40% Melee
• Melee Attack: 35 (x2 multiplier against cavalry and shock infantry and a 1.5 rate-of-fire)
• Ranged Attack: 20 (12 Range, 1.5 rate-of-fire → typo! Should have been just standard Musketeer RoF!)
• Siege attack: 36 (range of 6)
Similar Siege and Speed to Halberdiers (the units they lack), the 2 Pop count accounts for the very strong Melee attack and resist. The HP is a little lower than a Jannisary and the ranged attack is the same, so my thinking is that if you’re just using these as a super, ranged musketer you’re using them very inefficiently, however if you can get them in melee, they will do very well holding down the enemy.
Happy to hash that out still!
1 Like
Wow thanks for coming back to me on this but I don’t think all these stats fairly represent a 2 pop unit. I think the unit is too cheap as I’m pretty sure the unit has to cost over 150 resource to classify as a 2 pop worthy unit. I think if we are going to have it as a 2 pop anti cav unit we should compare it the stats of a Samurai or a Doppelsoldner. So maybe a slight increase in hitpoints wouldn’t hurt for an increased price. The rest of the stats seem sound. The range attack is going to be rapid at 1.5 rate-of-fire tho .
I’m presuming the 3 musk HC cards would affect these new Highlanders too tho.
Ah whoops! I Yep, that would be rather rapid - sorry I think I made a typo there (standard rate of fire please!).
Happy to change the costs and HP to balance out. I think basically at its core I was aiming for a musketeer that has bog-standard/mediorce-even ranged attack but really is very tough in melee with its attack and resist. The only thing I would like to avoid is the area of effect attack as that’s the realm of the aforementioned Samurai and Dopps - I think its ‘thing’ of being great on single units and tougher than normal melee resist thanks up for AoE (also these guys would be bayonetting rather than welding huge swords).
Maybe 220 HP and 100 Food 50 Coin, justified by being a melee-tough guy that whilst lacks the AoE and the lofty 230/240 of the solely-melee guys, does get a standard-range musketeer attack and a higher melee resist and attack. I’m awful at stats though, so don’t hold me to any of that and change as you see fit!
1 Like
I personally dig the Redshanks Idea. Feels like you can get the aesthetic of a Musketeer with much much higher Melee DPS with a charge ability for closing in. Has a similarity to a Carolean fighting style.
Borrowing a feature from Sweden isnt bad. After all Germany and France borrowed from inca’s Age alliance card albeit slightly altered.
Also like Sakers. Can see it as a royal guard upgrade of Falconets
1 Like
Reviving this topic.
When I’m thinking about it, I find it weird that some would defend against any change to British because they are a “simple, straightforward, beginner civ”. I have no idea where that comes from. As bad at pvp as I am, I don’t find it beginner friendly at all. Even when it was considered strong.
The true beginner civs are:
French and Spanish: full unit roster. Most units are regular. Maybe the most simple and straightforward bonus. All you need to learn is the constant villager training just like any other AOE game, plus the timing of some pivotal cards. You don’t need to manage a lot of things because there isn’t any.
Ottomans: you don’t even need to worry about villager training.
—All those civs got far more interesting and unique stuff in the upgrades.
As for other similar eco civs, Japanese and Swedes have much less raid-able eco, and you don’t need to worry about them after you dropped the buildings.
—And they have the most unique and diverse stuff from the very beginning.
Now British. Unit roster is lacking. Longbow is good but hard to master (while yumi is a regular skirmisher). Other units are good but not so impressive (while other eco civs like Swedes and Japanese both have super units). You need to manage your villagers and they are more susceptible to raiding than houses. You need to have a strong awareness of literal map control. You have a huge power drop the moment natural resources close to your base (esp food) run out. A lot of noob players (for example, myself) cannot handle these well.
So it is by no means a beginner civ. I can’t see any point of keeping it boring.
3 Likes
@ArrivedLeader22 This is just a guess but I think the reason as for why some people would be against making changes for an old civilisation is because they are also veteran players of [Age of Empires 2] as well.
If you are familiar with how some people behave from the [Age of Empires 2] community then there are those who won’t like it when someone suggests any kind of drastic change for the older content.
I remember giving a response to a post made by another user on the [Age of Empires 2] forum section who suggested that a unit named the “Traction Trebuchet” could be added to the game. But since the term is of modern origin I suggested instead that it would be better if it was given the name “Mangonel” since that is the historical name of this type of siege engine, and where the already existing in-game [Mangonel] could be renamed to [Catapult].
The only responses that I got from this comment that I made were people complaining, including from the OP as well, that it would be “Confusing” for the playerbase to give the name of an older unit to this new unit instead [which would be more appropriate] or answers like this:
The funny thing is that the user who came with the suggestion of adding the Traction trebuchet to the game is also active on the [Age of Empires 3] forum and have created their own threads for what changes can be made for this game. Even for the purpose of clearing up some historical inaccuracies that are present in the game.
There were also two other users on that thread that I know are active posters on the [Age of Empires 3] forum who chose to give likes to the comments that did not want this change.
1 Like