Recent archaeology would suggest that the Roman invasion in AD 43 was more complex than the notion of a climatic battle. Some, if not most, of the Britan tribes welcomed the Romans and became early allies. They knew the advantages of being a part of the Roman Empire and were motivated to cooperate with the Roman Army.
The Romans also liked to take as hostages the children of local rulers. These hostages were taken to Rome where they were well treated and were taught the Roman system. They were returned to their homeland when the Romans were well established and they became the local rulers, acting as agents for the Roman empire. It was good to be a Roman and most of the world wanted to sign up.
Of course, some tribes resisted, including tribes in Dorset and in Wales. Evidence of Roman battles in Britain is extremely rare with legends and fragments of historical records providing only a few clues of what might have actually occurred.
There' s no Roman newspaper morgue, or archive of reports from the legions, but the surviving information shows that the most habitable and pleasant parts of Britain were conquered straight away, and the dumps (Caledonia for instance) were not bothered with. Britain was a popular place to live and the locals adopted a number of Roman cultural norms. The economy boomed and traded by sea even into Byzantine times, it remained remote from tumults on the continent, and the supposed revolts were short-lived and quickly eliminated and forgotten. Literally the only evidence Boudicca ever lived is found in a Roman account. Modern nationalism among Europeans has included looky-heres to exaggerated ancient resistance that not only was brief and clearly unpopular, but involved earlier coats of paint that the current locals' ancestors superseded.