Tim you should give up your favorite nation!

[The Huns]

First off I'm not calling for a nerf. Like many top players I plan on changing over to British soon. But as I said earlier going over my defensive logs in the last 20 battles one third were British. They had an average level of 166 and averaged 63% damage to my base. A quarter of them were French, had an average level of 166 and averaged 51% damage. A quarter were Korean, had an average level of 166 and did an average of 49% damage. A quarter of them were Roman, had an average level of 167 and did an average of 43% damage. While this is anecdotal it is a pattern I've seen before when I ran the numbers. British players do more damage to my base on average.

And to break it down further: In my last 20 defenses 4 were from Industrial age bases. One was Roman level 158 and did 13% damage. The other three were from British and averaged level 145 and did an average of 47% damage. In other words a British Industrial Age player of level 145 is about equal to the average Korean or Roman Global Age player of level 166 and almost as good as a French Global Age player of level 166.

I agree that offense is overpowered in general for "full" war attacks. But if they nerf offense in general then I would assume we would start to see this imbalance in wars as well.

Again I'm not asking for a nerf. In 1 day and 14 hours i will have the workers to change to British and it would upset me greatly that they nerf British right after I change. I'm only asking people to be honest about the fact that the British are the most powerful nation.

 

[Wendy]

no one's denying that the british special unit is the best!!
But what you say about the average destruction doesn't make much sense to me.
Level is determined also by things like roads or caravan and farm so you can't just prove that by the level of players that attack you.
i have a lvl 122 in my alliance with GP age roads and caravan and farm at lvl 1 but with zeppelin, and capped industrial army, and a lvl 142 with no airstrip yet, still cannon and only Riflemen at IA level. If they both attack you i'm 100% sure the 122 would do better than the 141.( both romans btw)
If a korean player IA level attacks you using 6 tattics in multiplayer i'm sure he can take you more than a GA british who attacks without...
Sometimes i see people attacking me in multi with 2 generals planes, capped global army special units from the events and tattics, and i see them fall badly...sometimes i'm 5starred by normal IA players with no tattics, no matter what civilization he's using.
Ability and rally make the difference for me, whatever you are playing with, only japaneses are the exception

 

[The Huns]

You are right level is not exact. So I looked at armies now. All were maxed for their age (Industrial had Artillery, Supply Truck, BW, Tank: Globals had Howitzers, Heavy Supply Trucks, Battle Tanks, KRR/SMG).

EDIT: If you don't believe me check your defensive logs. I'd love for confirmation/refutation.

 

[Mr Suplex]

British french and romans are the trade goods i have tha most of, but you tend to use those as well, but since they are tha leftovers...

This is just another piece of anecdotal evidence that an imbalance exists.

 

[Mr Suplex]

I get the point, I just think its not a good one. Alliance donations are not a reliable buff for most people relative to just having an awesome special that is so dominant entire armies are built around it.

 

[Mr Suplex]

1. If we are to take away the +1 range from British, what advantage then does it has as compared to Korean or Chinese archers? And nation bonus wise, won't it have significantly less advantage? I would rather trade to have more workers or an extra tactic, since resources are less of an issue in late game with long build time. It will be relegated to a useless nation too.

2. Yes, range is over powered at lower ages, but it's not entirely true from IA above with tanks in play. A German manoeuvring heavy tanks, French with their S35 etc show that other nations and other units are quite powerful when combined too. Range do suffer from the worst AI in the game, with archers shooting walls all the time, canons wandering off n shooting at farms etc, while tanks, in a way are "smarter". As witnessed by many global age players, they complain of stalemates, which means at end game, every nation are rather strong in offensive power regardless of whether it has bonuses in attacking or not. If only British are capable of 5 stars, u do have a valid point then.

3. Star craft one is a rather balance game, I'm not sure why you use this example. As much as a plus one range is desired, many other upgrades like getting spells or rushing to air units or even faster move speed on most basic units like zerglings to counter range can be considered game changing too. In dominations, getting tanks and planes and betrayal etc are game changing for most. British plus one range is indeed powerful, but so are other benefits like Super tanks and increase damage to all units including air. I believe Germans are slightly stronger and offers more flexibility than British in global, and the difference might get even wider depending on what atomic age offers.

Its not my job to figure out what the British should get instead of the +1 range. I would say give them the Korean buff and see what happens. Japanese and Germans already share the same buff for their unique unit, so its not without precedent.

+1 range never ceases to be an extremely powerful buff, at least up to where we are with Global age.

I use Starcraft as an example because it illustrates my point that having a +1 range advantage is an enormous benefit. Only the British have access to this, and it makes them too strong relative to other nations.

Just look at the player base. Why are so many top players using British? As I've outlined, its a combination of the rifle/SMG unit being overpowered in conjunction with the British having the best version of that unit. I think the real nerf needs to happen to rifles in general so we see: a) more balanced army compositions and b) more balance in nation power

 

[Ravenlord]

There are other ways to counter Brits range. Strategic tower placements for example. Certainly the university upgrades to mortars/towers is a step in the right direction - buffing!
Maybe Nexon can also add another suggestion I've seen many times - speed increases for defending troops depending on road connections to TC. I think this would be a great addition - and coupled with defensive upgrades at the Uni would make the brits less - and defenders more - powerful by comparison.

 

[Wendy]

I'm full of koreans, romans and japanese

 

[Wendy]

tonight i've been attacked 17 Times (17!!!)
Only one of them won of course, he was brithish with IA army and took me one star,( i have the TC outside, so i'd say it doesn't count)
6 of them were demolitions on my oil.
All the others were people trying to farm me with raiders with no result. I had about 30 crowns more!!
The last players Who took me 5 stars in multi the last days are 1 british, 1 roman(a lot of htmk3) 1 korean 2 greeks
Greeks and french also attack me a lot using 9 tanks to destroy walls and go straight to the oil
With french tanks you can do it 10 Times in an hour: you lose them all and in 3 minutes you have them again
I think that's OP

 

[Wendy]

complaining is easier than thinking solutions

 

[The Divine]

Romans are really useless,What makes you think they can match with korean,british,french and german?I have been playing with romans for a while.

 

[Brand Marrow]

Yes, planes can help but they are so damned unpredictable and expensive to retrain!
Rally on mortars works for some bases, but try it on mine and your troops will all be history.... they are clustered for crossfire and positioned so that they cant be shot at without climbing through barbed wire....

 

[IzEagle]

No Title

Two attacks in the picture is an example of over power of British. An IA British can take more than a GA French with help of mercenaries!!

 

[Mr Suplex]

Wendy I have already proposed multiple solutions, but I don't have access to the player data that Nexon has, so I can only speculate as to what the best course of action is. Raising the issue (you call it complaining) is better than doing nothing and watching as more and more players migrate to British and we have even more nation imbalance.

What medal range do you play at?

 

[Mr Suplex]

Those are good suggestions Raven, but they are just good base design in general and good against any type of army. But it doesn't address the fact that British armies are still relatively more powerful than their peers, so they will still perform relatively better than other nations' armies. I still think that changing how riflemen work will fix both the problem of riflemen spam and the problem of the British being OP all in one swipe. But I've lost faith in Nexon and their ability to balance this game.

I do really like the road network idea. That is cool. Defense has been getting some buffs in Global age and with some of the library updates. I hope it continues.

 

[The Huns]

Switched from Roman to British and it's better than I even thought. I thought maybe French had an advantage with retrain times, but when you lose much fewer troops it makes retrains a snap. I used to get four or five battles in a training blessing. Now I'm getting seven or eight. The extra loot is sweet as well.

I should say, the hardest part of the switch is changing how to attack. Remembering that no troops, no matter how many or how high level can touch you if you keep your troops together. Two heavy tanks rolling towards you? No need to send out the planes and risk losing them. They won't even get a shot off.

 

[Ravenlord]

The Brits were known for their Longbow men - ie: they could shoot further than anyone else. What IS the point of reducing the Brits range? It's the '5' range that gives the Brit nation it's uniqueness!!

 

[IzEagle]

The British should have +1 range but as Mr Suplex says the shooters are generally overpower. Range of all shooters should be reduced to 3 and for British it will be 4.

 

[Eddie F1]

Longbows were Medieval and could shoot further, but how does that translate to WW1 & WW2?

And why are they sub-machine guns? They are generally an inaccurate close-quarter weapon, assault rifles have a better, more accurate range.

But Nexon missed a trick - should have changed a Nations Unique with each age (to reflect history), then we'd have to change Nations when upgrading a TC

 

[Ravenlord]

And why does a bazooka troop move quicker than an smg troop? And why do tanks not crush troops? And why do SAM missiles have a smaller radius than a Classical Archer on a tower? All these questions and more won't be answered in due course ......