Why does everyone hate house of lancaster?

[Shade]

I've been an English player for a long time and in higher ranks Normal English starts getting phased out, they're supposed to be a turtle type Faction, and now they have a faction that is actually considered somewhat usable for a more of a turtle type play style people hate it?

[Butter Bot]

So the issue is that they can play economicly without investing defensively.
In itself its fine that what english do, the issue is that they don't need to expend either until later (because manor give food), so its very difficult to do some proper damage to a landcaster when harrasing, especially that the economic thing you want to kill have 3500 hp
Then if you try to out boom them you lose because landcaster can pop out 11 heavy cav forcing you to invest into unit instead of eco.

So that the core issue with the civ, being able to play defensively and econnomically without expending.

And then they are other lesser issue like yeoman volley shot delleting half the army like a mangonel shot that add salt to the wound.

[Playerguy11]

RTS strategies generally revolve around three main trunks: rushing, booming and turtleling.

Rushing beats booming, booming beats turtleling and turtleling beats rushing.

Lancaster can turtle while also booming.

Aussie Drongo explained this

[Gundalf]

Another problem with Lamecaster is that they are heavily favoured in lategame fights simply because they need far less villagers for the same economy as the opponent allowing for more army population.

[KekiWekiPeki]

Originally posted by Butter Bot:

And then they are other lesser issue like yeoman volley shot delleting half the army like a mangonel shot that add salt to the wound.

Not only volley but yeoman by themself are extremely overpowered units

[Laguz]

Yeomen are a mix of Yumi Ashigaru and Longbowmen, with none of the downsides and an integrated mangonel shot on a cooldown.
Lancaster can bypass many counters by just brute forcing through. They have a strong eco for it that doesnt need many villagers, their strongest unit don't cost gold, and have a really strong imperial.
I won a 1v3 in imperial with just longbows and spears, you don't need anything else.
The worst part? It's easy. The 1v3 was my first match as lancaster.

[Attackmack]

Everyone is Yorkist :/

[Cantore]

See, I disagree with all of this. I like to turtle with Lancaster, but they are SLOW to get their technology and their defenses up in comparison to say ... the Ottomans, who can farm gold like nothing and spit out troops overwhelm before I can get to the later stages where Lancaster shines. To top it off, the devs keep on nerfing the CRAP out of Lancaster because some people don't like the play style of Lancaster, simply because it doesn't require a ton of land to keep up the economy (again, ONCE YOU GET TO THAT POINT). The key is to stay alive that long... which is honestly not so easy against some other nations whose strategy is to hit quickly. My guess is that those players who like fast paced games don't like a turtler who can defend themselves until they get strong and stomp them out. The like to simply manhandle them with massive armies and overwhelm them asap. But, Lancaster WAS the only one that could formidably defend against that crap... and now they'll be nerfed so badly - who knows if there's a point to playing them now.

[Butter Bot]

Originally posted by Cantore:

See, I disagree with all of this. I like to turtle with Lancaster, but they are SLOW to get their technology and their defenses up in comparison to say ... the Ottomans, who can farm gold like nothing and spit out troops overwhelm before I can get to the later stages where Lancaster shines.

I don't get it landcaster might be the fasted faction that build up defense with a castle at age 2.

[The Owlogram]

The new nerfs are extremely light, I don't even expect them to have a real impact. Funnily enough I found most success in early game with them because when I get all ined in feudal I can just scout the rams being built, stop making manors and make army to defend, then once I repel the attack I can just finish my manors and go to the enemy base/age up. On the other hand I keep losing to feudal booms because the games then gets to the later stages, and HoL is more raidable late than early because manors aren't good enough to make up for 0 villager and I struggle to find enough stone after I bought all my manors for stone walls/forts and those damn Templars steal it all every time. But I think that's a skill issue on my part, and that I would struggle more in these situations as Ottomans because their build orders are harder, they have to age up to add more military schools and unlike manors, schools don't give as much value once in late game because they don't do anything as long as you're pop capped.

[ARCAGNELL0]

The issue isn't the passive income. It's the fact you can't kill the demon civ in feudal and that their units are just nuts, Yeoman above all of them.

The yeoman as a unit can't be killed by anything that's not cavalry or mangos while at the same time getting an active ability that allows it to snipe high value rear units like crossbows, which is why doing Yeoman + Knight is what's most popular right now.

You can't go spears because Knight Yeoman just kites you to death and the moment you go crossbows they volley shoot them into the dirt while their Knights kill everything else along with their armor debuffing spears.

This issue won't be solved by increasing the yeoman price. It will be solved by
1) nerfing yeoman speed first and foremost,
2) gating manor number behind age ups (only 4 manors in feudal, 8 in castle, 12 in Imp or something)
3)nerfing Lamecaster castle to not provide free arrowslits to ECONOMY buldings
4)reducing the tech discount from their age3 landmark

The civ can be buffed in other areas to compensate, but allowing it to have a 90% trash army capable of FULLY dealing with heavy gold units has to go.