The Britons are a quality civ in every age, and they’re incredibly difficult to put away. They’ll be a great civ in practically any meta, on practically every map. They can boom, they can fight early, they can fight late, and save the cavalry, they have a great selection of military, very little you’d miss.
This is a strong, but well balanced, civ.
And very usable for all ELO levels.
You do know that Singleplayer aoe gamers are propably in the majority to us multilayer only gamers.
Of course game also needs to balanced for these people. It is always a compromise.
I would argue that the Britons happens to be one of the best balanced civs in terms of being viable in both team games and 1v1. I’m not sure what you’re getting at. They’re perfectly viable, and very strong, as a team flank. They even make your other flank better.
Dude mass ele archers are too much for the AI to handle. Heck, just build a palissade wall around their base in dark age and they auto-lose. If anything the AI is kinda ok at handling briton archer just because they can swarm them with units and you can’t micro a blob of unit spread out like that and hope to kill them in time.
Any reason that dev needs to cater campaign players?
I’m still liking even with the edit 11
yeah I know but I then realized what Geojak was talking about and I realized that while my point was valid it wasn’t actually addressing his point, which was campaign and singleplayer vs AI, which… How would you ever balance for that? I can comfortably 2v1 the AI with any civ. How can I judge the strength of a civ against competition so clearly incapable of giving me a good game?
By giving a strong civ more options you are buffing them. There’s no way around that.
The game is balanced for single player. You can do whatever strategy you want and win against AI. If you can’t, you just need to get better. If extreme AI is too easy, go and play online. There’s no need to have any balance changes related to that. It will be fine anyway.
What balancing should be about is those cases where you can’t just become better and fix your problem and where you can’t just go somewhere else, because it’s too easy - that’s the highest level of play.
Of course if something is terribly broken for low level players are even AI games, I’d agree to change it, but that’s certainly not the case for Briton range.
In 1v1 RM, Britons are currently performing better than Turks, Mongols, Italians, Chinese, Cumans, Malay, Spanish, Bulgarians, Byzantines, Vietnamese, Saracens, Tatars, Koreans and Portuguese.
Buffing them is such an insane idea that it shouldn’t even be entertained. Pretty much every expert player agrees that Britons are a top-tier 1v1 civilisation. Buffs are for civs that aren’t performing well against other civs, not civs that already have a fantastic lategame and Feudal archer play.
Edit: They’re OP in single-player too, haven’t you seen the Spiffing Brit video…?
From aoe2 stats Britons had %48.73 play rate with %4.75 play rate. %100/35(civ count)=2.85 so there are a lot of players love/play Britons. Their winrate about %50 and reached more than %50 in other patches. And their play rate even reached %6.
In conclusion I think graphs tells us don’t use British stable and they are balanced.
Oh boi this guy isn’t really good for AoE vids. He also made an AoE3 vid about how Sioux teepees are OP. He kept repeating that you could make your friends ragequit that way, even tho he couldn’t attack the moderate AIs at any point in time and his mini map showed how he had 0 map control 11
Don’t listen graphs and use Briton cav in situations where cav is needed, it might not be very good but it will always be better than losing the game.
I was memeing a little bit 
TSB is a pleb, but I don’t think his AOE2 video is too far outside the general player-vs-AI experience! I certainly used to play like that before I started in multiplayer… wall off the shallows, spend an hour ‘booming’, mass as many ranged units and castles as possible, funnel the AI etc. – if we are talking about the “difference between singleplayer and multiplayer balance”, I think that video makes a fantastic case for why Britons are fine both ways.
Because it would synergize well with Yeoman’s +2 tower attack. I honestly do not know why you are exactly opposing me here on my proposal for Free Arrowslits for Britons as you offer not explanation on why you disagree with me…other than perhaps that you are disagreeing with me because you want to pick a fight me.
Again, it seems here that you are trying to pick a fight with me. If you are not going to contribute to the on-going discussion, then do not make any more comments on this post, please. We get it that you disagree on buffing Britons, and you need not have to reiterate that.
I can tell you why anyone would be opposed to britons getting free arrowslits - Britons don’t need buffs. they are one of the best civs in the game
Very well. Fair enough. Britons do not need buffs. But what do you think about the +2 tower attack from Yeoman? Don’t you think that that is a weak bonus to Britons and should be improved a bit to make it more meaningful?
Take this as an example: Saracens used to have a pretty dumb bonus of cavalry archers dealing +3 bonus attack to buildings and the team bonus of all archers +1 extra attack against buildings. But the devs made the original Saracens civ exclusive bonus better and more reasonably usefull, when they shaged teh “only cavalry archers” to all archers deal +3 attack against buildings. Now Saracens are not juse a Camel and Navy intensive civ, but a Arbalest-civ as well.
I mean…the Saracens already HAD Arbalesters and all the necessary archer armor and attack/range upgrades yes…but that small change by the Definite Edition devs turned a miniscule civ bonus into a more useful (but certainly not overpowered) bonus.
What I am proposing is to make Britons’ Yeoman +2 tower attack bonus more reasonable in usefulness.
no. i don’t. britons are fine, and yeoman provides additional benefits beyond just +2 tower attack, and again, the civ is one of the best in the game.
The Britons need buffs to Conquer Asia and Africa again, as until 1960 AD.
Japanese get extra arrows, Britons can get extra range, doesn’t have to be feudal age, starting in castle age would be fine for the keeps line - a mixture of attack and range would be most useful. Keeps are in no way overpowered.