England Nerf? Why?

[KayAU]

Perhaps England will still get double trade routes in vanilla?

 

[Kouvb593kdnuewnd]

Perhaps England will still get double trade routes in vanilla?

I would assume that would be the case.

 

[homan1983]

The issue arised from the fact that the +1 trade route was moved from commercial hut to "own a lighthouse or market in the city".

What this meant is that if left unchanged, England could get 2 traderoutes form 1 Harbour district (harbour + lighthouse).

What they did was take the lazy way out and completely removed the harbour bonus. What this does it make England hyper-garbage tier. Anyone that tells you otherwise doesn't understand the fundamentals of the game.

They did the same thing before, making changes to trade routes in the Australian_Summer_2017_Patch:

• Commercial Hub and Harbor both provide +1 Trade Route capacity, but only the first one applies (used to stack for +2 capacity total)

Before realizing how garbage England had become and adding back in Spring_2017_Patch:

• Royal Navy Dockyard now always provides +1 Trade Route capacity, even if the city already has a Commercial Hub. This makes it more useful, even when England builds it on its home continent.

As it is, because unique district now cost population slots, England's only impactful civ bonus is removed.

Understand that harbour already has some incredible disadvantages compared to other districts:

1. Harbours are inherently less reliable and numerous since they can not be build in every city like commercial districts
2. Harbour adjacency is much less in sheer numbers, and less reliable. If you want the +2 from being next to city, that is in itself a disadvantage because a city next to coast has even more coastal (and even less land) tiles
3. Harbour districts for some reason don't get the +8 bonus gold from every city state that commercial does. What this means is that later in the game, Harbour districts fall behind SIGNIFICANTLY compared to commercial districts, ON TOP of not being able to be built in every city.

To make matters worse, the other bonuses of the english harbour are unreliable and/or flavour: +3gold IF ON ANOTHER CONTINENT and +1 movement for naval (whilst ok cannot be the basis of an entire civ's bonus). They compare unfavourably to the bonuses of the Hansa, unique russian holy site, unique greek cultural etc...

(And in R&F you will get +4 loyalty from harbour ON OTHER CONTINENT).

This "if on another continent" is the reason that spain had to be buffed time and again, and is still considered a subpar civ, even though they have many bonuses.


So how would one fix this quickly?

• Why not create a ghost "lighthouse" (from a programming perspective) for England that doesn't add the +1 traderoute, but also doesn't qualify for blocking the market +1 traderoute. In all other areas it would look and act the same. What this means is that England could still get their extra traderoute, but would need two districts to get it.
• Alternatively England could uniquely get the "doesn't count as a district for the purposes of pop" back. This still would leave England pretty crappy as a civ, and could be aided by making the +3 gold from harbour universal rather than on other continents, leaving the loyalty bonus as a "different continent" flavour.

 

[Kouvb593kdnuewnd]

Harbours are like encampent or aerodromes, they are ment to be for unit production, ships in their case. The economical bonuses are really more for icing than being the major reason to build the harbour.

England is not garbage at all as it get really strong as the game progress and the new dockyard is going to help them in their theme as an expansionist civilization.

Commercial hub and harbour are not ment to compete with each other as they have different purposes for their existance other than being able to provide a trade route. In fact the strongest Commercial hubs are the ones placed next to harbours and rivers so the strongest Commercial hub cities are going to be coastal cities who can get the important +4 adjacency bonus for increasing the value of commerical hub Buildings.

 

[RohirrimElf]

England will have less loyalty issues on other continents. This is a new buff in R&F. I say England is stronger then before. Explained in the last stream by Ed Beach

 

[Kouvb593kdnuewnd]

England will have less loyalty issues on other continents. This is a new buff in R&F. I say England is stronger then before. Explained in the last stream by Ed Beach

It is a huge advantage to get half a govenor loyalty for free in all your harbour cities on Another continent. England is pretty unbeatable on the seas anyway so they can just grab pretty much all costal cities they see and get a free unit as well. Redcoats just dominate Everything else in their era for the finisher and super archaeologist make England very strong for a Culture finish.

 

[stealth_nsk]

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

And those players will still get their additional trade route.

 

[Siptah]

And those players will still get their additional trade route.

Exactly. I don't think the trade route change to first tier buildings will apply to vanilla. Nor will the changes to the cards - and why should they?

 

[PhilBowles]

The issue arised from the fact that the +1 trade route was moved from commercial hut to "own a lighthouse or market in the city".

What this meant is that if left unchanged, England could get 2 traderoutes form 1 Harbour district (harbour + lighthouse).

What they did was take the lazy way out and completely removed the harbour bonus. What this does it make England hyper-garbage tier. Anyone that tells you otherwise doesn't understand the fundamentals of the game.

They did the same thing before, making changes to trade routes in the Australian_Summer_2017_Patch:

• Commercial Hub and Harbor both provide +1 Trade Route capacity, but only the first one applies (used to stack for +2 capacity total)

Before realizing how garbage England had become and adding back in Spring_2017_Patch:

• Royal Navy Dockyard now always provides +1 Trade Route capacity, even if the city already has a Commercial Hub. This makes it more useful, even when England builds it on its home continent.

As it is, because unique district now cost population slots, England's only impactful civ bonus is removed.

Free units early in the game (as you'll usually have at least one other continent nearby) isn't a major bonus, but can be significant since it frees production for other things at a game stage wher you don't have much to go round.

Understand that harbour already has some incredible disadvantages compared to other districts:

1. Harbours are inherently less reliable and numerous since they can not be build in every city like commercial districts
2. Harbour adjacency is much less in sheer numbers, and less reliable. If you want the +2 from being next to city, that is in itself a disadvantage because a city next to coast has even more coastal (and even less land) tiles
3. Harbour districts for some reason don't get the +8 bonus gold from every city state that commercial does. What this means is that later in the game, Harbour districts fall behind SIGNIFICANTLY compared to commercial districts, ON TOP of not being able to be built in every city.

I can get behind much of the above, but this suggests to me you don't fully understand the utility of harbours. They aren't just aquatic commercial districts.

1. This isn't a particular drawback, and in fact without the second trade route it's less of a drawback than it was for England before. Previously England had to prioritise areas that could support both a harbour and a commercial district more than other civs. Now they're back to needing one or the other, with the option to build the other later at need - that's more versatile, not less.

2. Adjacency bonus is not the important attribute of most districts, as it's generally lower output than buildings and can be bolstered with adjacent districts. Harbours are good for production, moderately good for food, and provide some housing. Those are all generally better things to have than boosted gold income from adjacency and markets (though unfortunately you get Great Admiral points rather than a useful GPs).

3. Granted.

To make matters worse, the other bonuses of the english harbour are unreliable and/or flavour: +3gold IF ON ANOTHER CONTINENT and +1 movement for naval (whilst ok cannot be the basis of an entire civ's bonus). They compare unfavourably to the bonuses of the Hansa, unique russian holy site, unique greek cultural etc...

The big draw of the dockyard is that it's half price. While that's also true of the others, the gold boost is comparable to the culture boost of the Acropolis and the others don't get you a quicker trade route.

(And in R&F you will get +4 loyalty from harbour ON OTHER CONTINENT).

Also +2 on your own, I believe.

This "if on another continent" is the reason that spain had to be buffed time and again, and is still considered a subpar civ, even though they have many bonuses.

The only Spanish bonus that cares about other continents is the faith bonus from the mission. That's a world away from getting a unit, extra gold, and a loyalty boost all essentially free on another continent. Civ VI is all about expansion, so you're going to have plenty of cities on other continents without trying too hard.

• Why not create a ghost "lighthouse" (from a programming perspective) for England that doesn't add the +1 traderoute, but also doesn't qualify for blocking the market +1 traderoute. In all other areas it would look and act the same. What this means is that England could still get their extra traderoute, but would need two districts to get it.
• Alternatively England could uniquely get the "doesn't count as a district for the purposes of pop" back. This still would leave England pretty crappy as a civ, and could be aided by making the +3 gold from harbour universal rather than on other continents, leaving the loyalty bonus as a "different continent" flavour.

The flavour for extra loyalty on other continents isn't really there - it's more of a mechanical necessity. There's no especially flavourful reason for dockyards to increase loyalty - press ganging led to the War of 1812, after all...

Extra gold from other continents makes a lot of sense, though obviously not uniquely for England.

 

[Aurelesk]

They can work around Trade bonuses without adding more Trade route to both Commercial Hub and Harbor. Back in Civilization V, sea trade route was twice as powerful as land trade route. Maybe we can think that way. Having a Commercial Hub and a Harbor in the same city give +25% Gold for every Trade route starting from that city, increased to +50% for England with the Royal Navy Harbor.

I just throw an idea. It can be +50%/+100% or work for every yields and not only Gold. That's balance issue and I don't think I'm capable to think this out.

 

[Goliht]

Still making 500 gold per turn in industrial era onwards.. trade routes might well get nerfed but gold making has not.

 

[Victoria]

One suspects there will be no changes in the near future, we have what we have.

One slight correction to the above is +2 gold off continent not +3.

Up until now England has suffered because it does not have early strength beyond some additional cash. A lot of the game is about doing well early. Their starts are also appalling.

England is a different but equally enjoyable game, they are more about building up before attacking, getting a very strong cash flow coming in. This comes primarily from harbour CH triangles. Then strike, it’s just much more of a challenge on deity.

What a harbour is to me up until now realistically, is half a commercial hub. It gets the adjacency (yes it does, I play them, you decide where to settle) but does not get CS bonuses. So it’s sort of not half price because it gets half of what other districts get... but it does get it early and the other bits of the harbour are unique.

The additional trade routes were nice but a hassle, glad to be rid of them, for a start you had to build them all. Of course they were nice and of course with the new rules they would be strong but likely not as strong as Gilgamesh for example.

What is important to note is the synergy with Reyna is strong, possibly very strong. The lighthouse also has a change to increase water to 2 food and high population is strong. +2 loyalty on continent and +4 off is strong combined with Hic Sunt Draconis.

I am really looking forward to the release, I doubt it will be any better early than it has been but to me that is good, it’s about the experience, I like the way England plays, I am much happier with the +2/+4 and Reyna than an extra trade route purely because it’s different, it fits Victoria and it should be fun. I do not want an OP Victoria so bottom line...

... I am over the moon happy with the Victoria change.

 

[Sostratus]

England will have less loyalty issues on other continents. This is a new buff in R&F. I say England is stronger then before. Explained in the last stream by Ed Beach

This. England has an incentive to settle or conquer cities far away from its core homeland. The problem is that with loyalty, you would just be losing those cities in a matter of turns to the "natives" of those other continents. This would particularly be an issue with the AI agenda. So, they wanted to give england some kind of ability to counteract that.

Trade routes are a very powerful (if micromanagement intensive) mechanic. England could have nearly twice the trade routes- meaning double alliance points, or normal alliance points plus domestic routes, or any combination. This is insanely flexible because a trade route is worth a LOT of population- costs no housing, no amenities, no food, can put them anywhere on the map, and domestic routes can eventually yield +5/+5. Int'l routes, with alliances and cards... shudders...

What is important to note is the synergy with Reyna is strong, possibly very strong. The lighthouse also has a change to increase water to 2 food and high population is strong. +2 loyalty on continent and +4 off is strong combined with Hic Sunt Draconis.

The off-continent gold applies to shipyards, yes? With Maritime infrastructure and reyna, you'd have 3 base (City-CH-harbor triangle) *200% = 9 production shipyards, rising to 13 if the gold bonus is included in that. You can almost always build a triangle, any fish is just icing on the cake!

What England (and other seafaring civs) could really use is the introduction of the Maritime CS from the indonesia scenario into the base game. CS envoy boosts are a massive power creep over the game that harbors can't join in on.

 

[Victoria]

The off-continent gold applies to shipyards, yes? With Maritime infrastructure and reyna, you'd have 3 base (City-CH-harbor triangle) *200% = 9 production shipyards, rising to 13 if the gold bonus is included in that.

Off continent I will typically settle with 2 sea resources rather than a river, if I can get both then it’s +14 with naval infrastructure and +21 with both.
Then the CH gets 5 doubled to 10 for Reyna.
Then in a classic/media golden age with a shipyard you should get 32 gold, 31 science and 21 production just from the triangle.
More realistically with no river 28/27/21...+4 loyalty... that’s strong.

 

[NukeAJS]

I think we should hold judgement until we see how powerful +4 loyalty for a royal dock yard is. It might be really strong or unimportant.

 

[Goliht]

Really don't understand this complaint that england is weak.. esp not in combat a free melee unit from every city captured, not on own continent, is a massive boost after a few cities. You end up with so many soliders in domination runs you're deleting them just to free up resources and your economy.

The game should ideally scale trade routes with difficulty, at prince is should be whatever default it is set to then scaling up as you go down the teirs of difficulty to settler mode, perhaps giving more trade routes, bonus gold per lux etc. And if you're playing up the teirs towards deity it should remove more trade routes, reduce gold bonus on resources, maybe go so far as you only give .5 trade routes per harbour/econ district forcing you to build 2 just to get a route going. Which really would make sense.. running a trade route from one market to another market. 2 markets, 1 route.

There's tons that could be added to make trade routes better, like equal rewards so the sending and recieving cities get the same reward in either direction, esp in international trades. But even with the new R&F requirement to have a market in place to get the extra route, plus the extra gold per tile, plus adjaceny bonuses. Plenty of money in the game, provided you can find the right tiles.

 

[acluewithout]

England having double trade routes was a stopgap introduced in a patch...

Yep, it was. Trade route stacking was clearly not part of the original plan for England. But stop gap or not, it really worked and fitted the civ. Other civs (like persia) get bonuses to trade routes, others can do unique things with trade routes (Dutch, Cree). England just got more of them.

And I say ‘more’, not double, for good reason. Only coastal cities benefit. And only if you build two districts in those cities, which requires pop, production, and forgoing other districts like campuses.

One suspects there will be no changes in the near future, we have what we have.

Agreed. This isn’t going to change in the short term.

...What a harbour is to me up until now realistically, is half a commercial hub ...So [the RND is] sort of not half price because it gets half of what other districts get... but it does get it early and the other bits of the harbour are unique.

England also basically gets a discount for Commercial Hubs: CHs are worth more to England than other Civs because, with trade stacking, they retain their trade route even if you have a harbour. For other civs, if you have a harbour, the CH has less value because you don’t get a TR for that district.

To me, more CHs (and a backdoor discount to them) fits England as not only a seafaring / colonial power, but also a mercantile / financial power.

England has an incentive to settle or conquer cities far away from its core homeland. The problem is that with loyalty, you would just be losing those cities in a matter of turns to the "natives" of those other continents. This would particularly be an issue with the AI agenda. So, they wanted to give england some kind of ability to counteract that.

Settling or invading foreign continents is only situationally useful. And even with England’s bonuses, it’s a real hassle - eg build a settler, wait ten turns for it to get to the other continent, then you still have get that city online (which is possibly harder mid game); so, a long time before any return on your investment. Or go agressive: you can beeline caravels and frigates, but then your melee will probably still be only warriors or maybe swordsman, and you’re behind getting campuses and dominating your own continent. So, get all the campuses and swordsmen, redcoats etc first - but then those foreign cities have time for walls and units and tech and put up a hell of a fight.

And, after all that, your new city is harder to supply and defend because it’s so far from your core cities; and in R&F you’ll also presumably be fighting off loyalty from other established civs (does England’s loyalty boost give it an edge here, or just counteract (ie zero sum) the disadvantages a ‘colonial’ city has?).

***

I love where England is in terms of power in Vanilla. Firmly mid-tier. You have to work hard at the start, but are then rewarded with a solid mid and late game if you succeed. The expansionist bonuses are great, and situationally awesome, but with trade route stacking England also has other strategies open to it. Getting rid of this bonus, even with the loyalty buff, seems... unnecessary.

All that said, there may be other changes which buff England in R&F. All these new sea resources and features may make coastal cities stronger, and mean your harbours get more adjancies. Trade routes being restricted for everyone may mean England, with half price harbours, may still have more TRs than the average civ. And it’s hard to guess how loyalty and governors will actually play out.

 

[DWilson]

I think I'll have fun trying weird things with England, like trying to mass settle the coast of a foreign continent (e.g. 3-4 cities in one turn, each with a pre-recruited governor, the free unit acting as a garrison for bonus loyalty, and quickly building their UD).

On TSL Earth, this could play really well into recreating history if America and/or the Cree, Australia, or the Zulu are not in game. The challenge would then be not to lose the colonies.

 

[Craig_Sutter]

Can't England target a couple of cities on other continents that already have harbours... they immediately become RNDs. I think with a strong navy, a couple of coastal cities can fall pretty quickly. Loyalty problems quickly solved IMHO.

 

[acluewithout]

Can't England target a couple of cities on other continents that already have harbours... they immediately become RNDs. ...

It can, but again very situational. You’re relying on the AI building coastal cities, and those cities not also being complete junk.