why is england so weak in civ v?

[cx1987]

England the weakest? Look at the Iroquois...

Iroquois is one of the most powerful civs in the game.

When other people spend two movement points in the forest, you can treat it as road. Besides, these forest tiles can be used in trend route, which means you build much less roads than other players. Since a tile of road cost one GPT, you save a lot of money.

 

[Nares]

When other people spend two movement points in the forest, you can treat it as road.

Only inside your own cultural borders.

As for AI Elizabeth, she favors gold and science flavors, has low expansion flavors, and isn't very aggressive even if she tends to be hostile (prickly?). She's one of the few AI I've seen voluntarily go OCC under standard settings; the other is Wu Zetian, but Wu seems to be braindead when going OCC unlike Elizabeth, who almost seems tailored around her start on an Earth map.

 

[kivanc]

i don't understand what is being discussed here. the OP asked why england is so weak in the game and yes, england is clearly weak.
we are not discussing the reason of this, instead we're just discussing with some guys which are ignoring one obvious truth. according to the thread subject we should be discussing the logic/politics behind the truth.

come on guys. i know a good player can win the game with any leader but that is sth different.
england should have a boost in the next patch/EP; for ex: extra commerce from harbor.

also, i didn't like ottomans in the game neither.

the problem with playing with a weak leader is not only about the hardness; hardness is not a problem, you just play one difficulty lower and it is the same. But the main problem with playing with a weak leader is: you don't feel like you are playing with a specific leader, you feel like you play with a leader with no UA, a leader with no name, just any leader; it's like a meal without salt.

 

[Babri]

come on guys. i know a good player can win the game with any leader but that is sth different.
england should have a boost in the next patch/EP; for ex: extra commerce from harbor.

also, i didn't like ottomans in the game neither.

the problem with playing with a weak leader is not only about the hardness; hardness is not a problem, you just play one difficulty lower and it is the same. But the main problem with playing with a weak leader is: you don't feel like you are playing with a specific leader, you feel like you play with a leader with no UA, a leader with no name, just any leader; it's like a meal without salt.

Good point. Some UAs are very situational & some are totally useless eg. Ottoman UA. A good bonus for England could be some commercial advantage like more yield from overseas trade or water tiles producing extra gold etc.

 

[PibbZ]

It boils down to game/map settings I guess. I for one love playing England, Its navy will be unmatched if you're able to build a few Ship of the lines (even more so if you upgrade them to destroyers later on).

And strategically positioned longbows with the range upgrade can eat through attacking forces long before they can pose a real threat. Suits my playstyle perfectly atleast

 

[kivanc]

It boils down to game/map settings I guess. I for one love playing England, Its navy will be unmatched if you're able to build a few Ship of the lines (even more so if you upgrade them to destroyers later on).

And strategically positioned longbows with the range upgrade can eat through attacking forces long before they can pose a real threat. Suits my playstyle perfectly atleast

you turtle!

 

[PibbZ]

you turtle!

 

[Tokira]

I've had some nice games as England, mainly due to the longbowman. Also I've noticed that Elisabeth is always a threat in my games if she appears. She usually is quite active to declare wars - in my latest game as Greece she destroyed two civilizations and two city staes. She is always one of the top 3 civilizations

 

[kivanc]

I've had some nice games as England, mainly due to the longbowman. Also I've noticed that Elisabeth is always a threat in my games if she appears. She usually is quite active to declare wars - in my latest game as Greece she destroyed two civilizations and two city staes. She is always one of the top 3 civilizations

AI personality and leader strength at human hands are 2 different issues.
AI doesn't behave like humans do.

 

[Mac2411]

I don't find the English weak in the game and certainly don't find them to be the "weakest" civ. The Americans are pretty damn weak with their UA (although it can be somewhat useful in certain situations). They are certainly weaker than England in game.

 

[Airey]

I've been going down the list of civs trying to win at least one game with every civ. i have yet to win a game-prince level, with england.I would like to know if their are any players who regularly play as england what would be a good strategy for them in winning the game? all input welcome. /rant

Are you saying you won with American and fail with England
LBow and +2 ship mov't is great

 

[UrbanX]

yes i am saying that. i dont know what it is with england, but it just seems whenever i play as them i generate less gpt, advance slower with techs, cant keep my unhappiness under control. its funny, cause i can easily win a prince-level game with other civs which is why i have started playing with them more because it shouldnt be this difficult to play as this civ when i can easily dominate playing as other civs. with england i almost always struggle just keep up in the game.


I have a played a few more games as england. ship of line may be the single strongest unit of the renaissance era. coastal cities dont stand a chance against them, especially in that era. i had fun conquering city-states and capitols with it.but i still stand by my comment on her UA. it just sucks. plain and simple. there's no argument there. i have yet to really use longbowmen. but will update when i have.


and of course AI elizabeth isn't weak.

 

[Nares]

I've never really played a game with England until just now. Unlike some of the other "OMG" products from other nations, England has one I really enjoy; the super-archer.

When I first noticed that scouts upgrade to archers via goody huts, I began craving a double scouting promtion archer.

In my first real game as England, I've been testing some changes I made to the AI in the Civ5TacticalMoves.xml and Civ5MilitaryStrategies.xml files. I had built a few level three scouts, including the discipline promotion, and one of them came across an unclaimed goody hut deep into the Medieval era.

After clearing out the barbarians with a longbow, I'm shocked by my scout upgrading to an archer. Two turns later and I've got a +1 sight, +1 movement, +15% combat strength longbow (+1 range) that does not incur movement penalties from terrain.

Meanwhile, the changes I made already seem to have some interesting results that I'll now get to toy with with my new super-longbow.

 

[tokyochojin]

Will England be receiving an update in the new Brave World Edition? On all but archipelago maps I feel they are really underpowered.

 

[Unresolved]

Will England be receiving an update in the new Brave World Edition? On all but archipelago maps I feel they are really underpowered.

I doubt it. They have 2 of the best UU's in the game(though they don't really work together) and an average UA. I'd say they are fairly balanced, though I'd like to see their components work together a bit better.

 

[Viregel]

The extra spy for England can make a lot of difference, as they can defend their own cities as well as going after everyone else's techs. Besides, the +2 movement may apply to Cargo Ships, although I doubt it. By the way, if you play England by getting a ton of promotions for your navy, you can very quickly win the game with a possible + 4 movement.

 

[Vohbo]

Two spies is amazing.
Free range promotion is great for your crossbowmen.
Ship of the Line is just awesome, I often choose to use frigates for conquest even on Pangaea maps cause they can dominate so hard, and ship of the line is a lot stronger.
So I think England is in fact one of the strongest civs.

 

[Loucypher]

Will England be receiving an update in the new Brave World Edition? On all but archipelago maps I feel they are really underpowered.

Any map with substantional amount of water (heck, even standard Continents) will enable the British to lay down a good smackdown. Having naval superiority enables to take coastal cities easily which in turn enables one to force a point of entry into otherwise well-defended empires. (Last game as England I had, Atilla's Court was impossible to approach from the south, north or east - but to its west was a coastal city that got made quick work of and opened up to a perfect few spots to the Court) The Ship of the Line's insane power combined with the huge speed of the English fleet means that even bigger fleets tend to be shot to pieces. Only the Ottomans (and sometimes the Dutch) can hope to match the English and that's due to them stealing ships constantly.
Then there's the issue of support fire, which SOTL is great at. Have them around the coast and blast away against defenseless melee units the AI craps out.

There's more use for a navy then "Herpaderp attack city", which is something I think a lot of people have forgotten.

Also the Longbow STAYS good even when further upgraded, courtesy of the +range sticking. Hello there Gatling Guns with 2 range...the Keshik, on the other hand, loses all its upgrades. Which really is sad.

If you want underpowered civs, look at Germany, Japan and America. And to an extent India (their drawback can be played around with great results, but those UU/UB are just...sad)

 

[Sabrina]

elizabeth's unique trait just sucks. any other leader can gain it by building great lighthouse and or going through the commerce policy. i understand the devs wanted each civ to play uniquely but why not give a trait thats both uniquie and beneficial to the player when they play as that civ. +2 movement for all naval units?? really? this is suppose to compare to +2 culture for every city you build, or units always fighting at full strength, or 50% longer golden ages. all of those unique traits offer distinct advantages to the civ. + 2 movement for naval units offers very little advantage over other civs. a better unique trait would have been doubling the production speed of naval units for england. or even maintence cost for naval units reduced by 50%.

I've been going down the list of civs trying to win at least one game with every civ. i have yet to win a game-prince level, with england.I would like to know if their are any players who regularly play as england what would be a good strategy for them in winning the game? all input welcome. /rant

I am sorry but I strongly disagree. I am playing as England (semi-MP, continents, marathon) for the first time now and it is my best game ever. I don't think Hiawatha is weak either (the other human player is playing as the Iroquois). We are switching turns on the 2nd place in points (Catherine as AI is still leading but not for too long).

Back to England, it may not suit your game style, hell it doesn't fit mine either... everything points towards domination, and I am not a domination player. But it is quite an enjoyable game. First of all, England always starts on the coast. You don't have to scout around and risk your settler being killed for that. I got a great defensive position, having water on 3 sides of London and a chain of mountains separating my part of the continent from the "others".

Then I saw desert. A huge desert. Each time I see desert my brain screams "petra". So I settled my 2nd city on the middle of the desert and went for it. The 3rd and the 4th city are on the coast, like London. All of them with gold mines and at least one other luxury resource. Since the 3rd and the 4th city are "younger", right now I'm focusing on infra-structure on them, and building ships in London and land units in York.

On the UU specifics... the Longbowmen are great. They don't move fast, but they are very strong. After taking Stockholm with 2 galeasses and 1 trireme, I moved my bowmen in turns of 3 to the last swedish city and started shooting, until I got at least 3 promotions on each. Then I had to move in with the pikeman, because Boudicca was about to do the same. The best thing IMO is that when you upgrade them to gattling guns, they don't lose the +1 range. So yes, I'm over-producing longbowmen as long as I can.

The SOTL is stronger that the frigate and thanks to the UA, moves faster too. It requires iron, which I don't have enough, so here is where my 2nd spy comes in handy. I spent some gold to get allied with a CS with iron and kept my spy there to rig the elections, so I don't have to pay again. Iron supply is secured for a LONG time. As for the other ships, extra movement is great when you start crossing oceans. Specially when you manage to be the 1st player to do so (I was). Almost all my luxuries are being traded at the moment. I still have 2 silk and 2 gold, which I'm saving for when I meet the 2 last players.

So, all this said, I think England is pretty strong and agree it can be even stronger in a water map. It is pretty flexible too, I mean, any civ can win a cultural game with the right wonders, but England UA and UUs make it also possible to win by domination, diplomacy and even science, since the science booster buildings are on the same path to navigation in the tech tree.

As for the 50% longer golden ages, this is easy to beat, just build the Chichen Itza before anyone else does, because no one wants to play against Darius + Chichen Itza. Darius is not in my current game, so I'm the one with 50% longer golden ages

Just to end this huge post, I don't think there is a single "weak" civ in the game, all of them can be awesome if you adjust your gameplay to take most advantage of its traits. Maybe (I said maybe) Austria is still a little OP, but I think the happiness hit of acquiring a hugely populated CS works fine as a break. Maybe I change my mind once I played as all the civs, but so far, England is really great.

 

[Greasy Dave]

I don't think there is a single "weak" civ in the game, all of them can be awesome if you adjust your gameplay to take most advantage of its traits. Maybe (I said maybe) Austria is still a little OP, but I think the happiness hit of acquiring a hugely populated CS works fine as a break. Maybe I change my mind once I played as all the civs, but so far, England is really great.

QFE.

I hate posts where a poster says, "I'm a better player than you, so what I say is right".....but I'm just about to do that So apologies in advance.

I don't mean it in an arrogant way but what Sabrina says is right. If you find England are weak, the problem is with your playstyle, not the civ. Adjust your playing style and I think yuo'll see that England are anything but weak.

I agree, on pangeas you can't take full advantage of the SoL, but continents or archipelagos (TBH, archipelago maps as England are just OPed) they are civtastic. PLus, TWO Spies at rennaissance - TWO! I'll take that as the UA right there, and the extra sea movement is just sugar on the top.

Playing England, you need to leverage advantage from the UU's and the spy and focus on serious expansion. You don't have to go for a full domination victory if you don't want to (dominating to a sci vic is also fairly easy). But turtling won't win you any games at the harder levels.

TBH, I think the UA and UU's for England are really spot on, if you're looking for a nod to historical precedent. After all a significant factor in the rise of the British Empire was aggressive expansion and a dominant navy. (Yes, there were many other aspects to it - but aggressive colonisation was part of the core). And Englands UU's and UA's push the player in that direction. For me England is an almost perfect civ....slightly obtuse strengths that you need to think about, but if you get your strategy right you can find ways to leverage the civ to crazy levels