- User Since
- Feb 17 2017, 7:33 PM (280 w, 2 d)
Certainly better than the current one.
I like some changes, mainly from archers <> crossbowmen.
Sat, Jul 2
Up @Freagarach changes.
Fri, Jul 1
Thu, Jun 30
I need to redo this patch. What chester said makes sense. I find it more interesting to increase the cost of wood rather than food.
Also, I think the movement speed aura is enough, we don't need two auras, what do you think?
Tue, Jun 28
Changes by @Stan
Fix Bug found by @real_tabasco_sauce (barracks can train archer champion)
Add vision and territory influence for ice house since can build only own territory
Remove territory decay enemy since can build only own territory
Mon, Jun 27
Ice house must allow garrison infantry and cavalry?
Sun, Jun 26
Fix WARNING: Researcher without ProductionQueue found: 2776 by @marder
Upload new portrait on summary
Sat, Jun 25
Fri, Jun 24
Yes it looks good now. I'm just not sure if the attack boost is enough, either way it's necessary.
I'm more inclined to accept this patch over the other. I think it's simpler and can also fix the current problem. Ax Cavalry should be stronger against buildings. Currently he can fight some units, but he's not very effective in big fights, and I think that's not wrong, he must have his weak point too. How about just increasing your crush damage to 2.8 or 3.0? It becomes much more effective against buildings and something better against units as well.
Wed, Jun 22
The changes seem good to me.
What about crossbow cavalry p3?
If affects cavalry so stable need able to research this tech too
Tue, Jun 21
I don't like how it looks now, it seems more generic and less realistic.
Why metal loot if dont cost metal?
Mon, Jun 20
I full agree @marder
I have other opnion. Very strong but high price.
Yes, start with crossbow is unique and fun.
For sure 50% is an extremely unbalanced value. 20% is a fair value, but next to technology it can be op, so I would keep 15% for technology and 15% for aura.
Looks like fun. Overall, the unit scares me less than fanatics. I think some sneak attacks on buildings should be interesting, but I still think ax is a unit that needs to be reworked.
I don't think it's interesting to switch from technology to aura. This is a unique technology and we need more of that kind of technology in the game. I think 20% is a fair value.
I think it's fair.
Sun, Jun 19
Not better just add limit of trained mercs?
Jun 3 2022
honestly I think the patch changes unnecessary things. I think that changing the ax cavalry to phase one, and lowering cost, would be enough to have a "special" unit. Its low cost would make it a unit capable of being trained quickly and in large quantities, being able to be very effective in small fights especially in phase 1. Maybe it would increase its crush damage a little, so that it would be more effective against buildings, and maybe also a higher capture rate.
Jun 1 2022
I didn't really understand the changes only in the _e template. Will he lose armor reaching elite? Armor and velocity change cannot be done in unit_cavalry_melee_axeman.xml template? Why is it necessary to train in elite?
At the moment only Persia uses this type of cavalry but probably other civilizations will, so it makes more sense.
Getting cavalry moving at that speed makes it basically uncountable. Spearman cavalry cannot chase.
Dec 30 2021
Sep 23 2021
Further reducing the need for expansion which you already see as an issue? Also Roman and Kush already have this build outside of borders feature, so not unique in any way, just reducing the uniqueness of those already having such.
I believe the higher hp are historically correct for being bigger ships, however if this is affecting the balance I suggest reducing the movement speed a little (also historically correct), adapting to their larger size and weight (also because they can carry more people). The lower movement speed adds historical value and should solve some or all of the problem, as well as avoiding making civilizations even more equal.
Sep 17 2021
Sep 16 2021
To be honest I don't think every civilization needs to have a generic economics bonus.
Sep 2 2021
With a mahout I see no problems.
Aug 27 2021
I like to include corrals in the bonus, I'm just not sure about the values. The Kushita kingdom was incredibly rich. I don't know if it's possible (@wraitii), but it would be a very interesting bonus if the kushites player starts the game with 25% more resources than other civilizations.
I think the most appropriate is "Fields -50% resource cost".
@wraitii some opnion here?
Jun 1 2021
I think it's unrealistic, but following the idea of the patch, isn't it more interesting to just lower the elephant's pierce shield?
May 11 2021
Definitely not a good idea.
I do not think it is necessary to use a technology to increase vision. Vision range aura should work much better and be more useful. The rest of the patch is required. The current situation was not well accepted by the players.
Apr 8 2021
Apr 7 2021
Apr 6 2021
Apr 2 2021
+5 pierce armor > +50% health
Range increased from 80 to 100.
Apr 1 2021
"none" can be an interesting addition.
"Deathmatch" must have the values proposed by "Millionaire".
it's an improvement.
Yes, I agree that historically a higher ange or crush damage is wrong. However, I don't want to be just an archer with another look.
Increase health and range can be quite interesting. If we keep the current range then I think we should increase the damage.
Mar 31 2021
I'm not sure if 70 is enough for archers with archery tradition for example.
I think these little diversifications between chariots, camels and horses are unnecessary.
I would be happy if we had a unification between infantry and cavalry. I think 75 is a reasonable number for everyone, although elephant and siege weapons may have different values.
Fine by me,, I never saw anyone build this amount of tower or fortress in MP.
Well i think unrealistic that women have the same mining power as men for example, but for gameplay it can be interesting to have the same collection rate for all resources, perhaps this would encourage players to take more attacks during the game, as women can supply the economy now. We would also come to CCs with men farming instead of just women. what should be better to defend.
Idk, maybe 40, but i think is not a good number for this patch, so..
Two reasons why I agree with that.
I like to standardize the number, but I do not agree with the choice of 80. They are very important units economically, increasing your vision makes it very difficult harassing.
I have never been in favor of different speeds for common units, for me ranged/melee must have the same speed, varying only in some cases. Anyway, it is a more pleasant situation that D3735 about camel rush.
It's good for consistency.
Although I want to see hack damage as well. Should be better in another patch, since changes in health are necessary.
Mar 29 2021
The rush/harras is very difficult in a24, but on the other hand with pacth it can be very easy. Balanced should work better, instead of 0 default arrow, I would choose 1 and keep <Capturable / RegenRate> 5, so we would have a total of 4 default arrows with the 3 technologies, greater than the current number. Instead of Capturable / RegenRate, we could have another more interesting bonus, like shorter training time for soldiers in the CC, increase cc range attack, etc...
Mar 27 2021
No problem with these changes.
What do you think of the defense structures having hack 20? I think that soldiers should be better able to damage these structures, not just depend on siege or special units.
I think it's fair, but two possible problems:
tooltip by @Nescio
I would actually prefer putting it in an Arab mercenary camp. To the best of my knowledge, there is no evidence for the Ptolemies fielding camel archers. That's a different discussion, though.
Wouldn't that bring it too close to forge technologies, though? (Those increase attack damage by 15% each.)
Mar 26 2021
I thought of a wider range than archers, like 72/74. Historically it was a defensive unit, behind the walls, so I think that a wider range is good in this sense, mainly because it will be a slower unit, proposed by this patch.
Maybe some changes on range attack?
Mar 25 2021
I didn't find anything about cretan archers, does it make sense that this unit should be trained only in docks and triremes or should it be moved to barracks?
Mar 24 2021
The values proposed in this patch are the values that were ideal for me. The main idea is that you can keep more soldiers fighting/training and less collecting.
The patch is correct and complete.