Hazza54321 wrote:lbs are an op unit, they just need a meatshield which isnt hard as brits, brits are a top tier civ, onlyy germany beats them and that match up is still winable
Idk man, brits are so damn weak to a lot of early fortress timings I feel. Lack of fast age kills the brit.
[Armag] diarouga wrote:I don t think brits lose to otto on the EP. That's maybe a bit otto favoured but you can win as brit. India vs brit is rather india favoured but, same, you can win if you do the right build.
I think whit brits you can win vs all civs, but brit has too Mu that are a bit too hard. For example, vs otto,india,ted
Hazza54321 wrote:lbs are an op unit, they just need a meatshield which isnt hard as brits, brits are a top tier civ, onlyy germany beats them and that match up is still winable
Ger don't beat brits tho, probs their toughest match up on ep
LoOk_tOm wrote:I have something in particular against Kaisar (GERMANY NOOB mercenary LAMME FOREVER) And the other people (noobs) like suck kaiser ... just this ..
Hazza54321 wrote:france dont and forgot about india and china
On most tp maps I would give france the advantage probably in that mu. India has proven in last tournaments to be somewhat of a counter to british, or at least enough brits dont win that easy. I have heard samwise and a few others before say china can win British also.
Hazza54321 wrote:france dont and forgot about india and china
On most tp maps I would give france the advantage probably in that mu. India has proven in last tournaments to be somewhat of a counter to british, or at least enough brits dont win that easy. I have heard samwise and a few others before say china can win British also.
British are good civ though ofc
He meant that he agrees that those civs beat brit.
[Armag] diarouga wrote:I don t think brits lose to otto on the EP. That's maybe a bit otto favoured but you can win as brit. India vs brit is rather india favoured but, same, you can win if you do the right build.
I think whit brits you can win vs all civs, but brit has too Mu that are a bit too hard. For example, vs otto,india,ted
Yeah, I too find ted a hard mu as Brits.
Well i very noob 1-1 but i can see the counter between civs, ted is very hard for brit, and well, dutch also is not a easy or normal mu for brits, on fp dutch >>>>>> on re, dutch> brits
Pizza, spaghetti, maccheroni, mandolino e tua mamma
Hazza54321 wrote:france dont and forgot about india and china
On most tp maps I would give france the advantage probably in that mu. India has proven in last tournaments to be somewhat of a counter to british, or at least enough brits dont win that easy. I have heard samwise and a few others before say china can win British also.
British are good civ though ofc
He meant that he agrees that those civs beat brit.
Hazza54321 wrote:france dont and forgot about india and china
On most tp maps I would give france the advantage probably in that mu. India has proven in last tournaments to be somewhat of a counter to british, or at least enough brits dont win that easy. I have heard samwise and a few others before say china can win British also.
British are good civ though ofc
He meant that he agrees that those civs beat brit.
Make the Adventurer 8 Longbows, and the Admiral of the ocean sea 800 or 900 wood, instead of 400 wood and a caravel. I also think that the tower age up should be buffed a little bit, like giving an exrta coin crate. Also give them a guaranteed 300 wood start, with the an extra random crate (100 food and 300 wood always spawn, as well as one random extra crate). I think a free gang saw could also be interesting and beneficial, but would require testing because it has the potential to be too good.
somppukunkku wrote:This is not a fucking discogame.
Yeah, but I still think they need some tweaking to make them a much stronger civ in the current meta. That would most likely have to be done by nerving some parts of Brit's power play, namely mid-game eco, while buffing other parts, like their fortress age shipments and politicians. I know what you mean by British don't need any buffs, and there is merit to that argument, but I still think they need a boost in getting to the fortress age, and being effective while there.
somppukunkku wrote:This is not a fucking discogame.
Yeah, but I still think they need some tweaking to make them a much stronger civ in the current meta. That would most likely have to be done by nerving some parts of Brit's power play, namely mid-game eco, while buffing other parts, like their fortress age shipments and politicians. I know what you mean by British don't need any buffs, and there is merit to that argument, but I still think they need a boost in getting to the fortress age, and being effective while there.
That's standardizing the civ which is the worst way to go about balancing a game, and something we want to avoid at all costs.
Yeah, but I still think they need some tweaking to make them a much stronger civ in the current meta. That would most likely have to be done by nerving some parts of Brit's power play, namely mid-game eco, while buffing other parts, like their fortress age shipments and politicians. I know what you mean by British don't need any buffs, and there is merit to that argument, but I still think they need a boost in getting to the fortress age, and being effective while there.
Not every civ has to be able to go Fortress and make skirm/goon/2 falcs for the game to be balanced. I'm a firm believer that a little variety is a good thing, and that having a couple of colonial-based civs (in a meta that seems to live and breathe the Fortress Age) is optimal.
Yeah, but I still think they need some tweaking to make them a much stronger civ in the current meta. That would most likely have to be done by nerving some parts of Brit's power play, namely mid-game eco, while buffing other parts, like their fortress age shipments and politicians. I know what you mean by British don't need any buffs, and there is merit to that argument, but I still think they need a boost in getting to the fortress age, and being effective while there.
Not every civ has to be able to go Fortress and make skirm/goon/2 falcs for the game to be balanced. I'm a firm believer that a little variety is a good thing, and that having a couple of colonial-based civs (in a meta that seems to live and breathe the Fortress Age) is optimal.
Thats a fair point. I would like to hear what you would do to brits, because I could seechanges to their colonial play being good for them, but Im not really sure what changes they would be.
somppukunkku wrote:This is not a fucking discogame.
If Brit needs a change I think we should keep it simple, and stick with our philosophy to not change the way the civ plays if we can help it. That means making them stronger/weaker in general rather than targeting a single aspect of the civ. I would look at a change to their crate start first, like -100f.
Goodspeed wrote:If Brit needs a change I think we should keep it simple, and stick with our philosophy to not change the way the civ plays if we can help it. That means making them stronger/weaker in general rather than targeting a single aspect of the civ. I would look at a change to their crate start first, like -100f.
so you think britt needs an nerf interesting.
"Losing to Callen was the worst night of my life" Gibthedurrty 2019
"If hazza can get pr42 with team i can get pr50 with 1v1" Gibthedurrty 2018
Lecastete wrote: Dude i hate this game. I am bad and i also dont have luck
I'm not sure, hence the "if". This tournament they didn't look dominant so we have no reason to change them right now. I personally do think they are a very strong civ though.
yurashic wrote:British are top tier on FP, just not many people play them because laming French with stagecoach is much easier.
or iro on re patch
I played some Iroquois and it honestly seems like they are not very good. They are not an all-around civilization. Imagine you meet a Portuguese player on a water map or a Japanese player on a big defensive map, or a no tp map. I have way more wins with Chinese.
yurashic wrote:British are top tier on FP, just not many people play them because laming French with stagecoach is much easier.
or iro on re patch
I played some Iroquois and it honestly seems like they are not very good. They are not an all-around civilization. Imagine you meet a Portuguese player on a water map or a Japanese player on a big defensive map, or a no tp map. I have way more wins with Chinese.
yurashic wrote:British are top tier on FP, just not many people play them because laming French with stagecoach is much easier.
or iro on re patch
I played some Iroquois and it honestly seems like they are not very good. They are not an all-around civilization. Imagine you meet a Portuguese player on a water map or a Japanese player on a big defensive map, or a no tp map. I have way more wins with Chinese.
lmao
Imao
"Losing to Callen was the worst night of my life" Gibthedurrty 2019
"If hazza can get pr42 with team i can get pr50 with 1v1" Gibthedurrty 2018
Lecastete wrote: Dude i hate this game. I am bad and i also dont have luck
I think all for civs that don't have a skirmisher type unit (i.e. Brits), nerfing goons slightly will help them tremendously in the age 2 vs age 3 fights.