Look at this picture. Can any of the devs tell me where we are supposed to place Eco in treaty games now that Torps must have HUGE spaces? This is just crazy and renders them useless. 1v1 games will be out of the question. You just killed off an entire civ with a patch.
11 Likes
the build-radius restriction seems so unwarranted… wonder what the motivation for it was in the first place. building more than 4 torps on a mine (unless it’s a gold mine) was just really inefficient anyway, and 1 gold mine often replaces 2 silver mines, so it’s actually necessary that more than 4 can fit.
It looks pretty laughable for treaty, but in reality, you only need to build 7, not 20.
1 Like
Excellent results in team battles do not mean that they must be champions in individual battles.
If you mean that the gap is too large to defend effectively, what? Does Sweden have no walls?
If you mean that the arrangement occupies a large area, you can copy Japan as a method of extending the field of vision, stealing resources in the middle area, and even if it is destroyed, it will still leave valuable blueberries.
The efficiency of Swedish villagers is the same as that of other European villagers. The reduction of additional economic benefits will killed off an entire Sweden. I don’t believe this statement.
1 Like
Idk, perhaps try to create more than 20-30 settler?
3 Likes
hes talking about treaty where you cant build outside of a certain area for 40 mins. meaning if you wanna use torps at all youre â– â– â– â– your whole base because you have no space left for your eco buildings and the walls.
7 Likes
Ouch, as an ex treaty player this hurts to see. They should’ve made an exception for treaty (if possible). Hope the devs see this.
2 Likes
I’m dropping sweden in treaty (maybe even in supremacy). Watch this civ not be played at all in treaty anymore. Their early economy gives me anxiety attack. You are already VERY much vulnerable to RNG as sweden because u are not guaranteed to have mines close enough to your base. And now u can’t take full advantage of blueberries because they do not spawn if the berries are extinguished. U don’t use wood crates in treaty so u can’t take full advantage of blueberries.
ALSO, for god’s sake the blackberries card is bugged, torps don’t collect them. Fix your game please. You destroyed this civ.
Bring the wood card for torps to age 2 . Or better yet, remove the card and make it default. Improve the range for torps, they don’t reach enough trees. They need to be able to reach 10 trees so they can have the same gather rate of one villager (0.5 wood/s).
6 Likes
overall sweden, and esp torps, were hit by too many nerfs at the same time.
the changes to blueberries: didn’t need to happen, like it seriously need to be changes back
the changes to AOE build-limit: didn’t need to happen.
like the nerf to the mining card was enough along with the wood cost increase, if the thing was still too strong afterwards then just keep increasing the wood cost.
the thing is Swedens food eco is bad, partially because of the berries supposed to make it up and partially because of oxenfurt reform, but i am not sure either of those options are going to be enough now, esp due to the lag of space and the really weird way that blueberries work now.
also apparently there is a bug with the blackberries card.
5 Likes
This is not an issue for Sweden on Andes Upper and some other treaty maps. Maybe they need to slightly increase the space to build during treaty. Haudenosaunee (Iroquois) always runs out of space in 1v1 and even team games in treaty (this was in the original and same in DE). That’s in addition to being the most stressful civ to boom with in treaty. Other civs like Brits will also benefit a lot from slightly bigger space to build.
1 Like
Building 6 torps on mine in Mongolia in rush (especially team games) was sooooo OP hahaha. That’s probably why they patched it.
No it wasn’t. There’s no difference in having 6 villagers mining a gold mine and having 6 torps on it. Plus it would body block any extra villagers u would try to use to mine that gold mine. Whereas a brit player for instance could have tons of villagers in that gold mine, all upgraded (while torps don’t have access to market upgrades).
It is only broken for sweden IF said gold mine was very far from base, because it gives sweden an advantage versus a civ that would use villagers to collect it. Here’s why.
In a map like fertile crescent, there are gold mines in the middle of the map, far from the players’ bases.
Sweden would have an advantage there because the torps are cheap and they get a blueberry again if they are rebuilt once destroyed. A civ using villagers would be very vulnerable to raid on the other hand, when gathering those gold mines.
An increased wood cost for torps fixes that, because sweden needs to think twice before building torps in unguarded distant places, just like other civs using villagers do.
So, again… increased wood cost. No need to nerf blueberries or increase the damn collision.
1 Like
Exactly! What were they thinking? I realize there may be slight balance changes over time, but this one is way beyond unacceptable. Lets make France not have horses, Russia no infantry or Ottos no artillery while we are at it making crazy changes. 
If it was not in the patch release notes, I would for sure have reported it as a bug.
1 Like
Nerfing the build radius restriction and the englesberg card was a bit too much.
I do think blueberries did need a nerf as you swedes could have their vills gathering only wood while torps where gathering the rest.
The civ could survive even if they lost half of their vills or more including their vasejust because of torps, rebuild their base elsewhere and win.
I would say if the civ is underperforming now, the englesberg card could be reverted or buffed a bit more.
Or they could just give sweden a 6 vill start and give them vill shipments on age 2.
1 Like
I don’t understand why the devs went so extreme in nerfing Sweden that they basically broke the entire civ. I can’t see how they are viable anymore. Really fun to buy definitive edition and spending hours building strategies for the new civ, just to see the devs destroy them soon after. I don’t think even the cry babies that asked for nerfing called for this…
2 Likes
I think the devs wanted a design change. Top players complaint was that the civ was too one-dimensional.
They didnt say the civ was op but that it needed a design change as you only needed to make 1 unit type+canons the whole game
1 Like
The caro nerf already adresses that.
The design changes were good, they took a step to the right direction, Sweden isn’t a 2-units civ no more. But the nerf that came with the redesign was too big TBH, they were a bit too heavy handed.
That said it seems that a new good BO got discovered for then, which is great.
1 Like
They have â– â– â– â– dragoon (atleast vs rifle riders imo) the caroleans lost ranged cav extra and now to more or less make the blueberry card and by that more or less the whole food eco of torps, i dont understand why it was thought to be a good patch to nerf, Every. Single
Aspect. Of the swedish early game, so yeah incredibly dissapointing to destroy a civ like that
Its like taking japans shrines away, probaly worse even since japs have yumis against ranged cav
This is actually a really good idea! If a civ needs more space than others it should be granted that extra space.
1 Like