I feel harbours are a weak district overall. The harbour buildings aren't specialized, they seem to be unable to decide if the district is supposed to generate food, production or gold. Because the number of districts you can build is limited, building a harbour means not building something else, and when trade routes are so lucrative, that usually means not building a commercial hub. However, harbours are overall worse than commercial hubs. Com hubs give Great Merchant points, which are still probably the strongest great person in the game even after losing the free policy slot. Economic city states also give big bonuses to commercial hub buildings while there are no city state bonuses for harbours.
If Firaxis really wants RND or harbours in general to be good, they need to address that last point. If RND gave great merchant points in addition to great admiral points, I'd be less opposed to building them. Also, 1/3 of commercial and 1/3 of military city states should be for harbours instead of commercial hubs and encampments. Harbour-military city states would give production bonuses towards units, etc. to harbours and Harbour-commercial city states would give gold bonuses.
Poor England. Keeps getting worse and worse. It needs something...
Every civ gets something "unique". I think the argument here is that England's unique district really doesn't measure up in comparison to the other uniques that civs get. Harbours are a bit of a hard sell to begin with and RND doesn't do much to improve on that. Each civ should be good at something in their own way.How about accepting that not all civs are top tier?
So after England are buffed to satisfy those who want it to be better,
do Firaxis then have to buff another civ because some people perceive
that one as the new "worst" civ?
Use mods if you want your favourite civ to be awesome so you can win every
game gloriously, and all by yourself.
I think some of the frustration some of us have has to do with the fact that England has been made worse for no good reason. Sometimes civs are nerfed because they were overpowered but England seems to have been just a casualty of circumstances and then gone down the hill.So after England are buffed to satisfy those who want it to be better,
do Firaxis then have to buff another civ because some people perceive
that one as the new "worst" civ?
.
Every civ gets something "unique". I think the argument here is that England's unique district really doesn't measure up in comparison to the other uniques that civs get. Harbours are a bit of a hard sell to begin with and RND doesn't do much to improve on that. Each civ should be good at something in their own way.
renaissance walls are something you can build in every city, at least. RND means sacrificing another districtIt's a helluva lot better than renaissance walls. Half price harbors that grant a free unit are pretty good IMO. Also, the Redcoat is decently strong and finished in the top half of the UU elimination thread.
renaissance walls are something you can build in every city, at least. RND means sacrificing another district
Perhaps if people actually tried making the most of England's bonuses rather than complaining about them so often they would find that England is decent.