Well after playing nearly 20 games of only using Britain, I am convinced they are no where near viable in 1v1. Games I should have owned opponents with were close games, and games I should have won I didn't. So what exactly makes Britain still so useless in 1v1?
- They lack an infantry unit which can hit and run. This was partially fixed by giving longbows a multiplier against heavy infantry, but overall they can't compete as well vs other infantry units which can hit and run. And to be honest, I'd rather have a unit that can counter the most currently common unit in the game, infantry, than the rarely seen, heavy infantry. If anything, they could have their old attack back with the multiplier which would keep them as a viable HI counter yet they could almost become as effective as hit and run able infantry vs other types of units (melee cav).
- Manours. Great for booming. But what if youdon't want to boom or you can't. Your screwed. Literally. The extra cost and huge amount of extra time it takes to build houses not only costs 35 more wood (which takes the villager that is produced ~ 110 seconds on average, without being disturbed to pay back for the manour before it becomes a bonus). Talk about a slow and non versatile start.
- Late Game. Is their late game really anything special anymore? Rockets aren't that great, I'd prefer HC instead. Late game longbows are hardly a threat to most civs which can now properly counter them. Their two strongest late game units, hussars and muskets, aren't anything special in contrast to what other civs have available. So why exactly is everyone running around claming Britain's late game is great? If anything, it's average .. if you manage to reach age4 alive.
- Weak FF. Yup, plain and simple. They have absolutely no solid FF strategy available, or counter to most FF's at that.
This isn't to say Britain is the weakest of the civs because I'm aware there may be worse, however it's fair to say that Britain always was and sadly will always be a bottom tier civ in 1v1.
Gameranger: _NiGhThAwK_
- They lack an infantry unit which can hit and run. This was partially fixed by giving longbows a multiplier against heavy infantry, but overall they can't compete as well vs other infantry units which can hit and run. And to be honest, I'd rather have a unit that can counter the most currently common unit in the game, infantry, than the rarely seen, heavy infantry. If anything, they could have their old attack back with the multiplier which would keep them as a viable HI counter yet they could almost become as effective as hit and run able infantry vs other types of units (melee cav).
- Manours. Great for booming. But what if you
- Late Game. Is their late game really anything special anymore? Rockets aren't that great, I'd prefer HC instead. Late game longbows are hardly a threat to most civs which can now properly counter them. Their two strongest late game units, hussars and muskets, aren't anything special in contrast to what other civs have available. So why exactly is everyone running around claming Britain's late game is great? If anything, it's average .. if you manage to reach age4 alive.
- Weak FF. Yup, plain and simple. They have absolutely no solid FF strategy available, or counter to most FF's at that.
This isn't to say Britain is the weakest of the civs because I'm aware there may be worse, however it's fair to say that Britain always was and sadly will always be a bottom tier civ in 1v1.
Gameranger: _NiGhThAwK_