0 voters
My opinion [for what it’s worth]:
The British are too strong, they’re consistently put at the top of most tier lists and have great early armies and eco. My ideal nerf would be to reduce their manor xp build bounty by 10-25%, this would slow down their shipments but not make them weak. It would simply slow their timings down slightly.
150 wood per manor will be a good nerf
someone explain how they are both at 57%
It’s just the british spain matchup. You are at a slight disadvantage vs a player at your same skill level.
You can vote for both
Nah, lots of people who don’t use Spain agree, and Brits are consistently put into S+ tier on pro tier lists.
¡How funny!. You should correct it to something optional.
In another forum they mentioned that the experience reward for building them could be reduced.
Los británicos son unas de las civilización mas estables del juego por ende creo esta civi no debería ser modificada .
They actually put either A or S, depending on their main civ. I’d say British are perfectly balanced right now. They have clear strengths and weaknesses.
o problema de quem joga contra britânicos ea quantidade de aldeões que eles acumulam. chega a ser ridículo as vezes em 7/8 mim ja ficam com 52 a 58 aldeão, mapas com muita comida e contra civilizaçoes fracas e praticamente pedir pra perde, os mosqueteiros dele acumulam muito rápido o mesmo com os arqueiros .
se fosse pra ter um nerf algo seria aumentar o custo dos arqueiros para 65food 45 wood eo valor das casa para 150 ou menos ou nenhum xp
A simple solution would be to reduce the speed at which the urban center produces settlers or reduce as many settler cards.
Yeah, I was thinking reducing the XP build bounty of manors would be a great adjustment that would flatten their XP curve and put them more in line with other boomy civs that have slower starts.
Yes, there is nothing OP in the British, except their big economic boost with their village boom. (It is not OP, but it is a significant advantage.) That is why you should be more specific in your survey.
Civs tend to be either good at rushing (e.g. russia), or booming (e.g. dutch), or balanced between early-mid and late game (e.g. Spain). The problem with the british is that they are OP at every stage of the game, which gives them too much flexibility compared to others and allows poorly skilled British players to climb up the ladder. They can rush as fast and strong as Russia, boom like the dutch for mid-game, and have strong late game too (Lakota as well although few players know it). Japan or India for example are the exact opposite, being weak at every stage of the game.
I was with ya on every point until you said India and Japan are weak but hey, we all have our opinions.lol
Could you explain British late game? (This is a sincere question not a rebuttal)
To me they have average eco (standard 99 vil + 2 factory with no special eco bonus after manor boom), average or even lackluster units (no skirm, average artillery, rockets intended to be unique but not as effective as heavy cannons, musketeers and cavalry are good but not among the best) and no late-game wild mechanics like dlc civs.
Their advantage is that they can reach imperial age faster than most others with the industrial age manor card, since they will max out the eco first. Essentially brits have 2 power spikes, one during their boom and another in industrial if they send that card. This makes it look as if their late game is stronger than it really is.
That makes sense. I was thinking about even “later” game where everyone has maxed their economy.
No, they are quite average when compared to other maxed civs. Also, if you don’t send that card other civs can max out sooner. So it really depends on playstyle. I’d pick ports or dutch over brits.
I really don’t think they need nerfing.