England Nerf? Why?

[Archon_Wing]

Came across this, and I'd like to bring this to attention

https://www.reddit.com/r/civ/comments/7t399c/rf_plase_give_england_back_its_trade_route/

England can currently stack trade routes with a commercial hub using their harbor. Regular harbors do not do this, and they're taking it away. Before it gave England a lot of money and possibly production to counter their lack of early game bonuses and tendency to start on crappy coast.

England was not that strong to begin with, but they were in a decent spot, so why pick on them? I could name half a dozen civs which could use the nerf bat, and they're not even DLC!

 

[Eagle Pursuit]

Came across this, and I'd like to bring this to attention

https://www.reddit.com/r/civ/comments/7t399c/rf_plase_give_england_back_its_trade_route/

England can currently stack trade routes with a commercial hub using their harbor. Regular harbors do not do this, and they're taking it away. Before it gave England a lot of money and possibly production to counter their lack of early game bonuses and tendency to start on crappy coast.

England was not that strong to begin with, but they were in a decent spot, so why pick on them?

Everything that gives extra Trade Routes seems to be getting the nerf bat, from Carthage to districts to Great People. My guess is that having so many Trade Routes would make alliances too powerful.

 

[DWilson]

Because trade routes have been moved off the district itself, and onto the first tier buildings (which England does not possess a unique building of). Instead, they get to keep the gold bonus, plus an added bonus for loyalty (larger if off their own continent). This fits thematically, as it allows England to settle "colonies" across the globe more easily.

 

[Archon_Wing]

Everything that gives extra Trade Routes seems to be getting the nerf bat, from Carthage to districts to Great People. My guess is that having so many Trade Routes would make alliances too powerful.

I'm not too concerned about nerfing trade routes themselves, but rather it basically removes an advantage the civ once had. And even if it were too powerful, they still don't get early game bonuses which really limits how OP they probably could be.

Not that this game cares about stuff being OP....

 

[JacquesBquick]

reducing the overall number of trade routes to manage sounds like a win to me!

 

[Kouvb593kdnuewnd]

Maybe early game bonuses have been nerfed due to loyalty and other Changes and the extra loyalty from the Royal dockyard should not be overlooked. Getting half the loyalty a governor provides is substantial.

England is pretty strong later on with its redcoats, free units, super archaeologists and such.

The new bonus fits Englands gameplay as an aggressive and expansionist civ more than a peaceful trader and Alliance seeker.

England was not that strong to begin with, but they were in a decent spot, so why pick on them? I could name half a dozen civs which could use the nerf bat, and they're not even DLC!

Which era you start in have great impact how powerful a civ is going to be. An industrial age start will not be particular good for Sumeria while it work well for England.​

 

[Scaramanga]

This seems like a buff because they settle further.

 

[PhilBowles]

England having double trade routes was a stopgap introduced in a patch - the civ didn't originally have more than anyone else when the game released, and so at least in theory was balanced around having the same number of trade routes as other civs. As long as the Royal Navy Dockyard is still half price they'll have an advantage over other civs in getting trade routes up and running sooner from coastal cities, as well as now having a loyalty bonus.

 

[Very Mad Max]

Just noticed, the only civ that would have guaranteed worth going for the trade route by building the tier one building is Poland. They get their Sukenience, which has pretty powerful bonuses.

 

[liv]

I think this may be OK. Loyalty will be an important part of the game it seems to and being able to expand easier may work out for them. I do not think that trade routes are that important and may be a double aged sword right now so this may be better. I am looking forward to trying it out

Also I noted more boats in the games I watched. That could finally be something for the English boats to pick up. That ability right now is a waste.

 

[KayAU]

I have mixed feelings about this. On one hand, I can sort of understand it. The double trade routes were very potent, and would have been even better with the new alliance system. The new loyalty bonus is fitting thematically. On the other hand, I liked having a reason to build both a Commercial Hub and a Harbor District in the same city.

England will still be quite powerful, though. They can still get trade routes more quickly, although the relative speed advantage is smaller now that the trade route is gained with the tier 1 building rather than the district itself.

 

[Kouvb593kdnuewnd]

Commercial hub is very decent even if it would not give a trade route and Harbor have basically the same purpose as an encampent while also having a better economical side.

 

[chazzycat]

why not? R&F is adding a lot more bonuses to trade routes from alliances. That would push England to be super peaceful, which would just be weird. Instead, they can try to flip cities with loyalty from the docs. If that fails, there's always redcoats. Seems a lot more historical to me and much more fun gameplay-wise. Total win win.

 

[Eric Guimarães]

at least they are getting a cute new palace

 

[kingofsealand]

I think the half cost harbor is still one of the best bonuses you could ask for on an island plates or similar map, where you are near guaranteed to be building a harbor as your first district in most of the cities you found. The initial production to get the harbor built and up to a shipyard is one of the biggest challenges to settling colonies that might not have much production otherwise, cutting that district time is just so valuable. Plus now they get extra loyalty, just gravy.

Their other bonuses still take a hefty time to come into effect but with Mary Leakey for example plus their magic 6 artifact museums you can get a powerful setup going and will have plenty of amazing cities to do so thanks to your cheap harbors.

 

[bite]

I think from some of the changes they have made they found that people were powering through the game too quickly so they are putting in some more breaks

 

[sonicmyst]

Also there is the issue of how to compensate England for the nerf if players do not get R&F. I expect vanilla players will be outraged.

 

[Kyro]

Everything that gives extra Trade Routes seems to be getting the nerf bat, from Carthage to districts to Great People. My guess is that having so many Trade Routes would make alliances too powerful.

"Make alliances too powerful". It's funny how they should think that given that they have done nothing to the Godzilla of strategy that is truly still all-powerful.

The extra trade routes for England made it competitive, now it's just back to weak.

 

[stealth_nsk]

Also there is the issue of how to compensate England for the nerf if players do not get R&F. I expect vanilla players will be outraged.

Loyalty bonus could be enough compensation. We have to wait and see.
But overall I like the reduction of trade route number in game, including this one.

 

[sonicmyst]

Loyalty bonus could be enough compensation. We have to wait and see.
But overall I like the reduction of trade route number in game, including this one.

But there is no loyalty mechanic if players do not buy R&F.