What Happened To Britons? | AoE2

[@pbsoccer2]

The "Nerf BRITONS pls" guy won

[@jacobwood3326]

1111 yes! Came to the comments looking for this lol

[@daarom3472]

I honestly think the archer line could do with a small reduction in gold cost. 45 gold is insane for a unit with such poor stats.

[@ParamecioLord]

What Brexit does a mf.

[@mrb3nz]

I had a great game as Britons vs Mayans on Arabia at 1450 elo. I opened scouts and turtled up for castle age and defended with knight siege agains mayan eagle xbow. I placed some defensive castles, went imp and transitioned to champions. Fully upgraded champions smashed the eagles and did actually well against not fully upgraded arbalests (I think my opponent was missing chemistry). Then the battle of attrition continued with me teching into skirms, so it was skirm + champion vs arbalest + eagle. I added light cav for raiding and that was the tipping gg moment. I think what would benefit Britons and the game as a whole is another small buff to infantry. Britons have full infantry tech tree, so if infantry received a small walking speed increase like Hera has been saying forever now, infantry would be a great ace up the sleeve of Britons. Now it's just situational

[@mubashirulmoula1798]

This is the age old Britons rework idea where crossbowman will be replaced by longbowman. Longbowman upgrade cost and time - 150food/75gold, 30 seconds Elite Longbowman cost and time 850food/850gold, 60 seconds → 500food/400 gold, 60 seconds Training time 18 seconds → 25 seconds (reduced to 22.73 seconds thanks to team bonus) Range 5, 6 → 6, 7 Attack 6, 7 → 5, 6 Attack bonus vs spearman +2 → +3 Accuracy 70%, 80% → 80% Attack Delay 0.5 → 0.35 LOS 7, 8 → 8, 9 [Elite Longbowman having 1PA is unchanged] New UU from Castle Billman - An infantry unit with attack bonus vs cavalry. Cost: 35food/40gold Training Time: 10 seconds HP: 75, 85 Attack: 10, 12 Attack Bonus: +5, +8 vs cavalry, +3, +5 vs camel, +12, +15 vs elephant ROF: 2.0 Melee Armor: 2, 4 Pierce Armor: 1 Speed: 1.0 LOS: 5, 6 Upgrade Cost and Time: 900food/550gold, 45 seconds Civilization Bonus Foot Archer +1/+2 range in Castle/Imperial Age → Tower +1/+2 attack in Castle/Imperial Age. Unique Technology Yeoman: Towers no longer get the extra attack. Cost and time reduced 750wood/450gold, 60 seconds → 600wood/400gold, 60 seconds

[@pez4]

i think they're infantry unique unit should not have high attack vs cavalry it should instead be cavalry resistant. Something like "Kings Guard" high armour, low attack unit with -XX% damage taken from cavalry. This way it's different from the halbs and it serves as a meatshield that allows your archers to deal damage

[@mubashirulmoula1798]

@pez4 Sounds good. I just wanted a non-ranged Kamayuk.

[@mdl2427]

Less attack on longbow archer will be killer, its one of the only good things left about it. Having more range won't really help...

[@daarom3472]

I dont like removing the standard roster and replacing them with unique units. The charm of AOE2 is that all civs are unique with more or less the same roster.

[@mubashirulmoula1798]

@daarom3472 Except Longbowman is not unique. It is just Britons archer line with +1 attack, +1 range.

[@sgtpepper8581]

After the team bonus nerf, britons become so bad, I think devs should spread the bonuses like archery range works 10% faster + another 10% from the team bonus and making the longbows being created faster like 2 seconds faster than the current civ, also yeomen is absurdly expensive, maybe 200-300 lesser resources

[@minikawildflower]

I like that concept, so Britons will still have the edge creating archers rather than bein outshined by a teammate.

[@minikawildflower]

Britons will always be S+ in my heart

[@alikaostermiller]

Suck+

[@fedakyn1583]

I mean the answer is very likely infantry. Having a drush or MAA play be more viable, and infantry play being more impactful throughout would really be a strong way for them not to feel like a one trick civ, while not buffing team game archer balls at all. This is actually true for all of the 1200-1900 bottom 3 civs on that list: Bulgarians, Britons and Goths, which i think would all really benefit from better infantry play.

[@7636kei]

0:28 meeow~ 😸

[@dardouces8485]

Liereyy´s cat defending Britons

[@kilianduclay6842]

i had to pause the video to see if it was mine ahahaha

[@jonathandb91]

The internet is insatiable over cat content

[@zoboe92]

@@kilianduclay6842 same lol

[@czulkanglah3098]

If he goal is to strengthen britons in 1v1 but not team games, I'd suggest buffing a complimentary unit to the archer line that is available in feudal age. Reasons: - In team games, it's usually a beeline to the civs power unit. Complimentary units come from the team, not the individual civlisation. So I suggest a strong 1v1 composition that is unlikely to come into play in team games to avoid team game overtuning. - It has to be a buff for the early instead of later ages as the problem is survival, not domination. - Part of the problem is the dependence on the archery range as well as the resulting predictability, so buffing a non-archer unit could mitigate the problem. But what unit should it be and how should it be modified? I suggest having briton spears take less/no bonus damage from skirmishers. Reasons: - Archers+spears is already the briton composition. This buff keeps their identity. - With Archers+spears, both main units are countered by the same unit. that should be avoided. - While it tilts the counter mechanics, later ages introduce counters to spears other than skirmishers, so the significance of the buff drops after feudal age, meaning after the period when britons need the most help.

[@Mattroid99]

Personally I think that if the civ gets Bloodlines it would become drastically more versatile. Since the civ is a one trick pony that isn't even that good at that until Imp (And has not very good timing plays, is very slow and predictable), it needs to be pushed towards army versatilty on top of their great archer play. I would heavily doubt the civ would become a cavarly civ, but at the very least you would have the options in matchups where a good cavalry compliment is needed. Their units are too generic in Castle for the crossbow line to do the job alone. Personally I don't think that Spear line taking less bonus damage would be that good overall, it would still be vulnerable to knight skirms and siege compositions and in Imp skirms are much less of a concern for Britons with +3 range and Warwolf trebs. Their weakness then becomes Siege Rams

[@WizardyDylan]

@@Mattroid99 maybe swap bloodlines for plate barding in this case

[@stinkinhippy1724]

Archery range techs are x% cheaper could be nice. It doesn't buff them too much in team games but makes fast castle archers more viable in 1 v 1 or just makes the transition from fuedal archers to a competitive castle age army a bit smoother.

[@pakumies]

What if brits had a castle tech to make training longbowmen from archery ranges possible? This would give them a pretty nice powerspike in late castle age if they can hold out that long.

[@peterhjort9243]

I'm here for this

[@pinkod666]

The biggest problem with the Britons is the lack of options, they have excellent archers, a fully upgradable infantry without bonuses, and an ok cavalry because of the lack of bloodlines. If we don't want to make them to strong, but better, we should give them another option, and give their cavalry the Bloodlines upgrade. It would make the cavalry an alternative option in the Feudal and in the Castle Age, and they also have better results in Imperial Age as well against siege and skirhmishers, without making them OP (without Paladin and Hussar, it seems ballanced in the Post-Imperial Age too, when they already have 11-12 range archers and excellent infantry, fully upgraded Cavalier and Light Cavalry could be be helpful to them). Also, I agree with everybody, that Yeoman should be cheaper to be able to make their archers (and towers) stronger earlier.

[@mathieul7338]

the Bri.ons ... love that Hera is pronouncing it with such a british accent that he drops all his T

[@LeicaFleury]

I think it's his canadian influence, haha

[@not...........]

He is censoring it because Bri*ons/Bri*ish is rightfully considered a slur by all non inbred peoples

[@rodriguedelhay1231]

Britons desserve the old magyar team bonus (+2 line of sight for archers).

[@willwarren8519]

There's multiple ways to balance them in 1v1s without helping their team games. For example, I would consider giving them bloodlines it doesn't help their team game power at all because they're going to be going archers in team games. But in 1v1s it gives them more adaptability in feudal age and Castle age but still doesn't help their late game comp at all because they miss paladin and hassar

[@gebhard128]

Bloodlines could be an easy fix for britons in 1v1, they get another option in castle age and it doesn't affect teamgames

[@BlueShellshock]

Britons have everything they need to be terrifying -- extra range on an archer is critical, and when crossbows outrange siege, skirms, and other archers by 2, that feels huge. It just feels like they suffer from the old 'Cav Archer' problem where you need so many upgrades to get there. Yeoman needs a castle, and Ballistics the university, so there's not so much a power spike as there is a power creep. Top it with, as Hera said, Britons not having any bonuses to any other units, and they're a one-trick pony. Mongols may be Cav Archer specialists, but with Steppe Lancer pushes, a significant bonus to Light Cav for Castle, and a crazy siege tech for Imperial, they have versatility. Britons got nothing like that when their archers aren't the play.

[@OwenLeBlanc-l7h]

As a Briton fan it annoys me that opening skirms is a thing recently. Imo, a decent small buff would be to give them a civilization ability that reduces the cost of the crossbowman upgrade by the amount of the nerfs increase. I doubt that would buff them in team play too much.

[@S1551]

That was a nice meow at the start

[@exeonx6561]

Couple of years ago archers dominated, going knights was definitely viable, but archer micro was easy and easy to get into, so it's normal that Britons were at it's peak, as they can beat out most archer civs in castle age with the +1 range, and not being vulnerable against siege either. Being slow is the only thing that really held them back. With the repeated nerfs against archers (direct or indirect), and buffs for many other units they have fallen off in 1v1's. The difference is that many other archer civs have many more options than just archers, Britons are pretty one dimensional in that regard. They could perhaps do with a buff, a slight eco bonus, perhaps bloodlines, or give their archery range bonus as a civ bonus and a new team bonus.

[@lafave2555]

general infantry buff would maybe help britons cause they already get FU champion line?

[@lautaromoreno3916]

That's exactly what I was thinking too. It feels like Britons have so few Civs Bonuses compared to modern civs, and the civ is TOO oriented for archers, making it like the most predictable civ of the game. Many said bloodlines, but I think a buff to militia line would be good against early agresions without beeing too OP late.

[@LeicaFleury]

@@lautaromoreno3916 I agree the militia line buff is a better option. Then again, you can just buff the infantry line in general and make this an indirect buff for britons and other civs like celts and aztecs.

[@lautaromoreno3916]

@@LeicaFleury yeah. I still don't understand what's so fragile of the balance of the Militia line that keeps them as the weakest of unit types since forever, and they still don't make it good.

[@casusincorrabilis1584]

The meta shiftet. Nobody is booming behind walls anymore also because you just would get forward sieged. And that's what Britons were best at. it was their main strat.

[@1nown]

Before I watched this, I won on arabia with Britons vs Poles by using archers in a support role and instead focusing on early feudal walls into pike + scorps + eco boom in castle age. Walling early is a decent counter to pre-emptive skirm play; the low damage output makes it slower to break in and if the enemy is impatient, they waste res switching to something else, likely cav, which sets up our pikes in castle age later. Xbows/longbows snipe off the main hard counter for scorps rn (mango line) and help with building up mass behind those pikes for a relatively early mini-deathball. The difficulty of diving ballistics scorps leads into forward castling to both draw the enemy into bad fights, give the siege somewhere relatively safe to fall back to, and melt through enemy walls. In that matchup specifically, it made it much easier to deny stone and clear out defensive towering, though since I was already on siege, it wasn't the best move by them. A better player could've punished fc harder so at higher levels, disguising this play would be more important. The britons eco is still better than vanilla civs but there's far more reliance on non-archer units which greatly limits favourable matchups compared to the past.

[@benedictjajo]

Everyone gets Ballistics Scorpions but Britons can't ever have thumb ring. Just give them thumb ring ffs. 😂

[@jackworthington5205]

Archer civ with no thumbprint is madness. And their LBM should come our way faster or move faster

[@radhikasaini8230]

No T R is a historical accuracy part.

[@RambinoYT]

Seeing my Favorite Civ never be played is so heart breaking. I love the longbow men and i haven't seen them be played in years 😭

[@CharSheee]

I think Brits could be buffed minimally without becoming too strong for team games. 1. archery ranges produce 20% faster again, but is civ instead of team bonus. 2. team bonus could be e.g. higher line of sight for archery ranges or ranges have more hp. Additionally Yeomen could have a small bonus for cavalry like 10 HP extra. The tech is quite expensive anyway and the impact would be only noticeable for the lategame.

[@TheSlackOne]

Yes, I would love to play Britons back again

[@dwsg1990]

This makes me feel better, I'm currently climbing ranks and I'm Britons main (I'm stubborn) and I mean main it's all I play, I have a win rate of 50% dead on, skirms aren't a worry for me I tend to out micro them and get into the eco early

[@timothymartensen9040]

I wonder if giving Britons bloodlines, but removing the last cav armor would do it. Gives you more options in mid game, but with the last armor missing, probably doesn't affect them late game. My only concern is that this change might be too much with how well Britons can boom.

[@rodriguedelhay1231]

Way too generic

[@iamsick5204]

As a mamaluke player britons have wrecked me in a couple of team games

[@lone5463]

Man saracens struggle quite a lot against briton archers.

[@georgehornsby2075]

Some archery range tech discount could be good for Britons. Keep their identity and help with techs in early castle age.

[@Klautsche]

For me, a 1100 low elo Player, the introduction of high pierce armor units like Savar ruined Britons a bit in Teamgames

[@LeicaFleury]

But the longbowman deals 3 damage per arrow to the savar...

[@Klautsche]

@@LeicaFleury Exactly my point, takes 55 hits or 108,5 seconds to kill a Savar, while it takes the Savar 3 hits or 3,6 seconds for the Elite Longbow. Other than that there are a lot of other counters to archers in general like Rams, Onagers, BBC, Scorps, Skirms, Gambesons made Infantry more arrow resistant, etc. On the other hand you have your trusty Franking Paladin that trades pop and almost cost effective against its direct counters like camels and Halbs

[@Nomatterwhat69]

Have you heard about halbs? Camels? Monks? Chemistry? Cavalry archers?

[@Nomatterwhat69]

Savars are a one civ thing, and paladins deserve to get 3 pierce armor since they are expensive. It's really not that bad for archers in the late game

[@Klautsche]

@Nomatterwhat69 well there's also Ghulam, Huskarl, Hussite Wagon, Rattan Archer, Tarkan, Inca Eagle, Champskarls, War Wagon, Serjeant. Ans those are all 8-12 Pierce Armor. All I'm saying is theres a shitton of counters to archers compared to other units

[@juanroig3996]

I really loved britons, one of my favorite civs I always play as a flank with britons or Ethiopians. I didn’t know the archers were more expensive now haha, but in team games I see britons a lot. Such a good civ from castle age, lack a bit in feudal but you can compensate later.

[@AnkitSharma-uw2ks]

Britons in black forest team game is brutal

[@LeicaFleury]

Which is actually a very popular way to play AoE2, as much if not even more popular than ranked 1v1 arabia ladder I would argue.

[@HappyDragneels_page]

now you mention it.... i cant remember the last time i saw a drush with some MAA in a tourney as of late?

[@QuintemTA]

After probably a year of pointing out in comments here or there of videos saying Britons are bad, Hera finally makes a video about Britons being kind of bad. I feel like there is a very long list of suggestions (already some have been posted) that have gone around for years. To give Britons a better experience. While I'd like the Longbowman being moved to the archery range because it makes more sense than Britons having super long ranged crossbows. UU replacement is another issue. Also I'd like to see the militia-line buffed first to see if it helps Britons at all. It could also be an idea to give Britons some infantry bonus. There are too many options and factors to list in a KZbin comments section. Thanks for highlighting the issue Hera, maybe one day they'll be more fun to play again (not a one trick pony) and play against (12 range longbowmen can be obnoxious).

[@cfban]

I was waiting for this video. The Britons are so cool yet so underwhelming in the current game.

[@nelsonmejiaslozada9362]

Winning stats are really important to analyze the behaviour of a civ for real, thank you for bringing that. "Tech tree experts" and small creators should learn from this.

[@MouseDestruction]

Originally Britons had one of the strongest barracks, no buffs to the infantry but fully upgraded was enough to put them near-ish to the top. I think they now get out shinned by quite a few civs that have special infantry or cav or a nice bonus to them, their barracks just doesn't compete any where like it used to. Perhaps an armor or hp buff to the infantry? Or could just add paladin I guess? One thing that would be cool is yard arrows for the longbowman, create a field of arrows that slows units down.

[@antonioescamilla5553]

I hope Britons regain the fast archer train(maybe a New bonus civ?) like aztec recover the a little of the bonus of military train

[@fabiobacinello9731]

Escuche un "MIAUUUUUUUUUUUUU" al comienzo del video?

[@clarkminer8650]

I still play britons all the time but I’m a noob. The britons cheap TCs is such a nice bonus

[@Stealelves]

IDEA: why not get special 1 time units and call the ability/skill Knights of the Round Table - you get 1 off hero style troops like lancelot(knight), sir robin(archer), gwain(swordsman, Merlin (powerful monk) etc etc and if they are near troops your troops gain a slight att/def bonus until the hero dies. adds a new dimension to the brits play and could even the battles with other civs that currently hold britons back in the 1v1 games, obviously teams could be super OP but just disable the tech when that mode is played. thought it would be a interesting concept anyway

[@TeunisD]

I still love playing Britons, but only late-game Imperial Age with lots of Longbowmen. Maybe their crossbowmen rush can be strong in Castle. By the way, they have Cavalry Archers.

[@hansoskar1911]

I agree with most of what hera said, but I think there is another angle: The turn to deer pushing and market usage (which is more limited now). the focus on deer pushing makes the britons sheep bonus relatively less impactful and Britons also really dont want to sell Stone bc they want their cheap TCs. Their reals strength is they do army + eco both really well at the same time and playing either army or eco has hurt them.

[@tlfearofthedarkhun387]

Maybe you can provide some advice or opinion as to how adjust a civ to fit for today's meta without making them too op? That would be great if you had to decide what that would be.

[@Denis-vr3sh]

For someone that used to play solely Britons, this is 100% true. I've even been forced to change. Opponents going early skirms (which is viable to get to castle), makes it a civ you're always on the backfoot.

[@jacobwood3326]

Hera looking at stats, let’s go!! Need to check 3k+ category next time. …oh wait…. That’s just personal experience 11

[@christophpeterson9964]

Beautiful thumbnail ❤

[@phza1]

Just make drush viable again... With Drush fc or drush duble range there are more options, it doesn't change the teamgame much and fixes other civs at the same time.

[@DirkTheDaringDnD]

Any chance you could talk about the Persians in the next video and why they’re performing so well? It seems like they were overtuned to essentially have a counter for every single unit comp in the game. The trash bows are an amazing utility for wiping out pikes and other low pierce armor targets while the Savar and War Elephants provide the brute force spongy melee strength. On top of this their castles become extremely strong with their new unique tech and they have access to bombard cannon to counter any siege threats.

[@miguelmarinblanco6367]

Maybe something like, we give they thumb ring, but lose the last armor upgrade, so strong archers, but weak if they are chased or outnumbered, or maybe something like give they bloodlines

[@breg5993]

Would extra building armor help? Might be an impact on team bf, but should help with the dying defensive playstyle you mentioned.

[@radhikasaini8230]

How about giving them thumb ring, making longbow accuracy unchanged by it, removing their range bonus, making longbows ranged accordingly and giving them bloodlines?

[@conqueror181]

The issue with Britons is as stated in the videos the archer upgrade cost nerf. Also Yeomen was nerfed by having it cost increased.

[@Maxarcc]

What if they buff the cavalry line-up for Britons to either have Hussars or Paladins? That would make their current death ball still optimal in maps like Black Forest, but it will give Britons a bit more flexibility in open maps.

[@Polisha_Edlp]

The britons make me fall in love with Aoe 2 when i was a kid so they have my respects

[@rickychardzz]

It isn’t just a nerf with the price but the nerf with attack move micro and pathing that made archer play even harder

[@Nomatterwhat69]

1) Make their archery ranges work really fast, even if that's not part of their team bonus. Like on top of their 10% team bonus, add 15% for britons. They should be able to mass archers just as well as mayans can. 2) Without thumb ring, they attack too slowly. So to fix that make their archer units attack 20% faster once Yeoman is researched (yeah nice tech right). 3) BUFF INFANTRY. Make the militia line cost 50 food initially. Make supplies, gambesons, arson cheaper (50 food 50 gold, researched in 15 seconds each). Supplies would make the militia-line cost 10 less food (40 food) and it would also apply to infantry unique units. Of course some balance changes would be needed, you don't want karambits to cost 15 food only. Also slavs would get double the effect from supplies gambesons and arson. Last but not least, make the militia - line deal +3 attack against the knight-line, starting with longswordsmen. Infantry should counter cavalry. Which then means archers would counter infantry of course.

[@灰烬-u8t]

1) Agree with that the archery range work need to be faster 2) I think Briton meant to be slow but have insane range as archer. Imo longbowman should have 2 more pierce attack than crossbow and Albarest. The yeomen can be either cheaper in price like 500/400 or give foot archer and towers another +1 range and +1 attack. 3) I think the issue of militia line is not it is costly.The main reason why militia line is weak is they have the worst mobility which make them awkward for either attack or defend. I think give them same speed as halbediers and +1 attack bonus to villager since dark age would make them viable.

[@Nomatterwhat69]

@@灰烬-u8t yeah I think it makes sense for Yeoman to be cheaper. Your infantry buff would be Celts + Burmese bonus (sort of), which could be quite strong indeed, but I think that we should focus most on making longswordsmen viable. Men at arms in feudal is not great either but it's not as unviable I guess

[@dj_koen1265]

@@灰烬-u8t i agree with 3 a lot, and have been saying for a while that militia should be as fast as halbs at least

[@MaximusLight]

Two things: 1. Britons have fallen off in the ~1000 area on both 1v1 and team games. Something I've found is that their late game is still really good and I think that's why they tend to do better in Team Games. That said unlike other late game power houses not only do they have a hard time getting to the late game but it is possible to fight them in the late game even with a disadvantage. I actually think this is good because unlike the say the Goths, ending them before late game is still a viable option but it's not the only option. For context I think the Goth are a bad example of finishing them before late game because they either win or loose based on if the opponent has something can counter the huskarl, they should be more like the Britions in this respect. (This may also be the case now that ballistic scorpions are for everyone. Which brings me to my next point: 2. The Britons actually rely on the their infantry a lot as without archers that is their next strongest option. Given that infantry and the militia-line in particular are not doing great that really leaves them vulnerable to Cavalry civs throughout the game. I think that's also why cavalry in general is so dominate right now, cavalry counters archers but with infantry so meh right now (especially in early castle age when knights get going) the only good counters to knights right now are actually not infantry and cavalry is really dominate as a result. I think if the militia-line had some buff that would make them a viable option to pick against knights in early castle age, at least until mass Pikemen becomes viable in late castle age, then we would see a lot of the imbalances start to even out.

[@faultier3215]

I think the cost increase of xbow upgrade 2-3 years ago was a total overkill, and the slight reduction they did was a bit to small. xbow adn arbalest upgrade another 50 res cheaper and we should be good

[@timoflo369]

+1 range in feudal would be fun, but overpowered. In fact, any buff to their archer line would be cool, but probably to strong. What about giving them bloodlines?

[@josedelacruzmoreno3107]

Attack for archers free, it is good enough for 1v1 and it does not really affect team game :)

[@ddurst1]

I figured it out. Give the Britons bloodlines and decrease the cost of Yeoman. Gives the Britons a strong mid-castle unit (and fully upgraded cavaliers) and gives a good bridge into imperial age

[@JAM_Brecher]

What about bloodlines, but they lose +4? So they stay the same in tg, but the early to mid gets buffed to have a reliable counter to skirms

[@LorenzoBredaggwp]

Just give to Brits bloodline for a better opening and a decent cavary option in Castle Age.

[@General_Ignite]

I feel like bloodlines could help a lot and don't think it would really affect team games much. Since they stop at light cav and cavaliers. Early game would be way easier

[@PaDaWaN17]

This seems like a Spirit of the Law video

[@davidahrner4876]

Bloodlines would buff them in 1v1s but not really in tgs. Although I dont know if that would be too strong.

[@timothymartensen9040]

I posted my thoughts on another comment, but I think them receiving bloodlines, but losing the last armor is the move. Cav is good in mid game, but stays roughly the same in late game.

[@nythyas123]

Do you think, if Longbowmen could be produced from Archery ranges it would fix Britons? Like Tarkans/Huskarls...

[@gonsalomon]

Hard to think about some historically accurate measure that justifies how unique formation moves to the masses

[@maushetzer1925]

Would make sense, seeing as commoners were banned from owning crossbows by Henry VII in England, and longbow practice was legally mandated by Henry VIII. Longbows would honestly make more sense as a unique upgrade from archers.

[@gonsalomon]

@@maushetzer1925 Still, hard to leave out either Yeomen or Warwolf to get longbowmen in ranges

[@tomassmith2088]

​@@gonsalomon easy. Yeoman represents all briton men being required to learn the longbow. Higher stats plus create from range

[@gonsalomon]

@tomassmith2088 Needs a cost adjustment, then, and it would do great

[@ar1sm70]

Funnily enough I was wondering about exactly that just the other day as I watching one of Liereyy's sets 11

[@burillito1265]

easy add bloodlines to cavalry and quit last armor upgrade, more playable in castle and focus archer in imperial

[@atomic3193]

I had this same idea, this give them a defence against cav in castle age and a good counter vs skirms until imp

[@ShadowBeetle]

isnt it weird 5:15 to go for step lancer against brits, who will always make archers?

[@SKErwin2]

Mix skirmishers with your archers if you have problems agianst other skirmishers.

[@ordinaryrat]

3:22 Can't believe deforestation made its way into aoe2 😔😔

[@TheJohnsonJohnny]

🤣

[@johnathonpauley5654]

Hasn’t even made it into irl yet. AOE2 is ahead of reality

[@theclaudeqc3rdone290]

@@johnathonpauley5654 Brazil: say sike right now

[@Aurichalcam]

Britons are a one trick pony from a different era. Now there are many many many different archer civs to choose. A lot of which give more variety to their benefits. Still, I would not change them. I think they’re fine if a little too predictable

[@SchlomoGoldbergstein]

Longbowmen shoulda learned how to shoot from horses

[@dj_koen1265]

i think britons could get a minor bonus for maa to give them some more viable options early on

[@AndyFontana11]

Give them thumb ring! 😝

[@les07derEroberer]

hear me out: give yeoman half the benefit of Thumb ring

[@kudoushinichi1412]

late game is not the problem of britons.

[@Captain_Maximus]

What about allowing longbowmen to be created at archery ranges once you reach imp?

[@KentPaulll]

Seeing the Gurjaras win rate at the highest level was crazy.

[@rodriguedelhay1231]

Some pros have no idea how to play them

[@CaptainCorobo]

Their ranges work faster. They have a dark age eco bonus They have one of the best booms with the cheap TCs. Their archers outrange siege and skirms. Theyre the franks of the archer civs and i dont understand how they're not seen as OP

[@IonDecebal-Cuza]

Guys! Is to crazy to take away their light cab and give them bloodlines in exchange? I mean not having a stable trash unit is huge in late game but you get a solid improve in mid game so you can do a mix army till you get your fully upgrades archer 😅 also knights are a very real part of the civ history

[@FLTG13]

Give +1 to the militia line attack. Also -1 light cav attack

[@TheMasteroftrees]

can you please say where to find the civ stats?

[@hzkaka5425]

to the guy who kept saying 'Nerf Britons plz'- Be careful what you wish for... it might just come true...

[@RoastCDuck]

Team bonuses for non military buildings should be 80% fast. Like smiths and universities. For military buildings should be 20% fast. Longbowmen should be able to deploy sharpened stakes, damages cavalry and slows infantry, siege can attack it. After yeomen tech it is. Towers fire more arrows ungarrisoned. Yeomen should do a bit more damage to cavalry... problem with brits is that range as an unique unit is quite bad and it has nothing unique apart from being a long range archer. Archers should be trained faster due to historical accuracy, the king banned games to have archers avaliable at all times. Also bombard cannons should have a bit more damage since they did have mortars.

[@CJ-111]

What about skirms being slightly less effective vs archers for britain?

[@TheLichkingMaster]

Add Imperial Unique Unite for each civilization

[@matthewmcneany]

I do think it's fine for certain civs to be much stronger TG civs than 1v1 Arabia civs. Britons have a niche, I think there are civs in much greater need of tweaking than Britons.

[@siprus]

I don't think this is really problem with Britions but archer civs in general. So buffing britions isn't gonna fix the issue for archer civs in general. The only archer civ with positive win rate (accordiong to AoE 2 stats) are Ethiopians and Vikings.

[@matercheff]

Hoping for a Japanese buff they never have really been in the spot light always kinda mid to bad

[@snap-313]

Hi youtube

[@JanusForssling]

Maybe the way to boost them in 1v1 but not in TG would be to give them Bloodlines

[@imchris5000]

the british turtle is super annoying to play against if they make it to imp even if you take all the res on the map and choke them it takes over an hour

[@MegaGouch]

Give Britons bloodlines so they have more options in feudal and castle age, that way you can't just assume they'll be going for archers.

[@PeterHannesKarlFranz]

Hi, i am finally ready to play online, but what do I need to do, be able to play ranked. It says „y need to have 900 points form random 1v1“ so do I have to play quickgames first? Thanks in advance

[@dj_koen1265]

you should be able to just play ranked, maybe its the benchmark test?

[@PauxloE]

So if Britons are much better in team games than in 1v1, I guess we need to find some ways to nerf them in just team games? Make the team bonus a normal civ bonus, give them a worse team bonus instead? (Or even a team malus?)

[@SilverFan21k]

Age of Empires 2.