volume
Clubman
|
posted
11-27-09 02:41 AM
ET (US)
236 / 269
Yes they require tedious micro - but if you use cheap scythes to slow down the armored eles you can use some priests to convert a batch - which will then give you a batch of armored eles to slow down the enemy. Remember that you have towers and possibly CA/ele archers firing into the armored eles too. With a few armored eles switching sides, the enemy will have a real problem with their rush. Skilled players are often judged on their micro.
Adding theocracy to AoE would be a DM-relative tech. maybe you can use other units to distract the elephants, but do you think they will come alone with elephants? i would at least have the heavy cats right behind mow every disruption that tries to distract my elephants first including the priests. the egyptian player then would be losing their other units distracting the elephants and the priests and everything else. skilled players are not judged on their micro. they are more judged on their macro or overall how they play the game and bring their civ to success.
you may add theocracy or something of the sort if possible or see fit.Some points: If you get out rushed when trying to rush - you lose. Your eco, already being poor, is lost Towers take time, only Roman can put up 2 towers, you also need 50 food - all these things slow you down if you were attempting your own rush If you put cavalry into someones town before they hit you, and they have wheel - all their villagers will do is run around and not collect resources - the rusher will have an untouched eco capable of growing and supporting a scout and some more cavalry towers deter archers in RM, cavalry can just run straight past and cause havoc (finding other villies, destroying houses etc Skilled players use wall brilliantly, they make sure under no circumstances you can get into them early, on maps like conti they will "dock" the shallows - at the same time they are trying to "rush" you Seriously, 1 cavalry followed shortly by a few more, a scout etc - and all they have is a wheel and 2 towers? Wall = no rush if you get outrushed when you rush you may lose if you dont manage. that does not mean you cant counterattack or counter-rush. Towers take time, but quickly with many villagers, i have done and have seen others do 3 sentries or sometimes more. the tower upgrades are very cheap and quick, the first one with only 50 food is instantly researched and i can take care of that already once i reach tool without a second thought. If you put cavalry into someones town before they hit you, and they have wheel - some of their villagers may run around and lure away the cavalry, some may race to gather resources elsewhere away from the melee, or if you found the large part of their woodies, and your cavalry are unarmed and unarmored - they may simply counter with a few towers quickly erected at scene and then bone and try outmuscling your cavalry along with rushing some more of their units including their own cavalry to get you. the rusher may have an untouched eco but may also not for long if they counter rush. trust me, dont underestimate such a scenario, i have seen and beaten such rushes with a counter-attack and counter-rush and have seen them and been beaten when they pulled the same on me when i cavalry rushed them and it wasnt piecemeal. i think its a matter of as the offense is bring the fight to the enemy but the defense is also i can beat the aggressor at my lawn. the rusher unless they can build forwards towards you has to bring additional troops from home to reinforce or replace the fight while you can simply train your troops and fight right on the spot quickly i did not say use towers to guard, i said erect them on the spot with your many woodies before/when the cavalry has come and then engage in a massive melee. using towers just to guard so cavalry can simply run through of course wont work nor is the right idea skilled players do use walls brilliantly, yes. but they do not necessary have to. they can simply "rush" and build forwards towards you. and they dont exactly have to be spending their time during the rush building walls to protect their forwards i did not say all they have is a wheel and 2 towers. if they only had that then its game. Wall = no rush. that is until they forward build outside your walls surrounding you and then siege. (;If a cavalry is in my unwalled town within 10-15 mins and all I have is a wheel and 2 towers yes.
If I take him out I then need to say "I need to wall" - and hope I have the stone and time before another cav comes running in.
If a scout hits me I take him out ASAP and then start expecting some axemen to walk in...
If I wall it is the common strategy - every player needs to protect his eco. well then there you go again and ASSUMED you ONLY had a wheel and 2 towers.
if you take him out then you dont need to say "I need to wall" - and hope you have the stone and time before another cav comes running in. you need to do it and build the wall but you might need to consider forward build and counter-rushing into the enemys town too.
but you get my point you dont just give up right? beat the cavalry just like scouts and try rushing in your own troops.
if you wall it is the common strategy - yes but you may move your economy forwards as well and you certainly not expectant to protect everything when you rush do you?I don't think you understand how to use it. Your scouting is far better, you find the enemy earlier, 2nd forage bushes earlier etc. It all makes a rush more likely and possibly earlier. yes, but afterwards other than that they dont make much difference like extra HP or armor etcetera do they? they dont exactly get an edge in the middle of a battle.Again I don't think you know how to use it properly. It makes a difference on hillz. Look up MaxCrazy on youtube to see how to hunt gazelle.
Also - micro skills split the good from the great. yes i do know how to use it properly and it doesnt make much difference because all it is is simply each persian villager can carry +3 extra food, thats it. unlike it is not an extra speed on their gathering rate. once in bronze, iron or even tool, it becomes even more insignificant due to farms. btw i saw this maxcrazy on youtube and i saw how he hunts gazelle on hillz. i do practically the same. and guess what? he researchs wheel the first thing right away when he hits bronze! and his villagers are spread out and many enough to pull off the counter-rush thing should he be rushed. i also saw him forward build his economy/forces. although he did need not neglect wall (using his forward buildings )
also - macro skills NOT micro skills split the good from the great. including like what your maxcrazy did. in case you dont know the definition, it means especially in games the overall manner in which a player manages his units and the development of his bases. (;...and then consider rushing? No no no - rushing is not an afterthought - if you have favourable starting conditions and your speed/success continues (age jumping/scouting) then rushing is what you do before thinking about upgrades and beefing up. A rush hurts because it creates a substantial problem in the enemy's eco before they are ready for it. If the other player has a strat and is capable of recovering (such as they have partially walled before getting hit, or have a forward on your doorstep too) then the game isn't over. But if they try and research most bronze market techs, some pit techs etc then try and rush - this isn't a rush - this is what is done on "no rush" games  like i had said, you upgrade and forward build WHILE you are rushing NOT before you rush.Well let's say I bronze rush in 14 mins, and I have the wheel at 13:30 - this will mean the wheel exists for 3.6% of the time. In fact, everything you have done (resource management, buildings etc) previously have not been effected by the wheel.
The wheel has little short term benefits - they are all middle and long term benefits.
You only short term I can think of is when some enemy units find a satellite pit (outside of walled town) and the wheel just kicks in to save them.
I would also say not having the wheel saves you food and wood which can be used towards more cavalry and more stables (for a rush). to expand/sustain your economy and faster afterwards, a wheel makes the difference. try playing persia versus someone who does the wheel first like what your maxcrazy guy did or better yet versus assyria who gets wheel first thing and race them to iron. you will see how thats particularly harder to do and for playability sucks in appeal besides it being inconvenient and unreliable. granted, you did without the wheel before bronze, but after that, then theres higher standards and all about speeding up including the race towards iron.
the wheel is an immediate benefit! and who cares about short term? its all about the long term.
and if thats your short term. id say you are too slow on thought. (;With similar skills and same speed eles the battle is going to happen in the middle (ele battle). If one ele is faster than the other it is going to happen closer to the slower ele player. It does hurt if the persian player manages to get their eles into the forward stables. Losing a few stables will make the next wave(s) weaker (in terms of numbers). It hurts the other player because now his backup (possibly siege) will have to battle fast eles. However, at present persia has little else to offer in DM - which is why I say cheaper archers. They can then throw in HHA and/or "fast" ele archers to pin the enemy back. Cataphracts are also more viable. Persia is still "gold hungry" - but also remember that there is more gold  i think you are talking about DM in this case. for RM however, that is provided the persian villagers are fast enough gathering resources to iron to even survive long enough to get their elephants out. and even in DM because the 'wheeled' villagers are faster, they can simply forward build more quickly their stables before persia builds theres. i would figure the faster civ getting the elephant out first and even use it to destroy the slower persian villagers still building their stables. also i think your persian cheaper archers thing is meager considering since you like talking about DM so much, i dont think cheaper would matter much wouldnt it? i think persia is too gold hungry and dependant on it. give them the wheel so to at least feed them with food! more gold dont mean jack if you are not fast enough to take them (;Yamato and Assyrian have the same villager speed bonus, and I don't think this will look poorly. Palmyran have improved stone miners (babylon), gold miners (egypt), woodcutters (phoenician) and hunters (persia). If the fast ele rush works and now they are facing siege (such as vs hitt), cheaper ele archers will help (they can take a few hits), hha will help (they can take a few hits) - or alternatively, playing defensive (failed ele rush) the cheap archers will make a nice defensive line against all non-siege units. Plus ele archers have crappy range (only get woodworking) so it is not like they are the best ele archers! and so whats wrong with yamato and assyria having same vill speed bonus? at least thats original and of course that is until assyria gets jihad! also have you begun testing with palmyran yet? they aint OP? because you got them at +50% build/work rate faster than babylon stone miners +30%, faster than egypt gold miners +20%, faster than phoenicia woodcutters +30% and faster than persian hunters +30% all together combined! persia already got faster elephant archers. making them cheaper in dm wont be much difference wouldnt it? also you need to consider the fact that elephant archer supposed to be slightly more expensive than dumbos/AE NOT the other way around.More villagers perhaps? thats still weak. theyre villagers need to move faster to gather in resources faster! they need the wheel!But the rush will happen before siege is out. The large radius will not mean much if the hcat upgrade is not done before getting overrun by dumbos. unless that player is a n00b, would they delay long enough to let that happen? you may make do with cat and ballistics if necessary.No, you don't have the food to make it drag on that long. The time allows for workshops and cat upgrades. you can always farm so you will always have food. also you did not explain why they will not go for siege because it takes too long just because the other guy has AE. if they use siege, siege will crush and will end the game quicker than to slug it out with elephants only.Sorry, 60,000 hp now where did you get the idea you had 60k hp all of a sudden?Well, sorry to sound like I am repeating myself but Egypt play a certain way. Giving them an easier choice will remove their complex strat. they may play a certain way yes. but their strat is not complex nor is giving them AE giving them an easier choice. they still have to take the time and many resources to upgrade up to it. so what else are they supposed to do with that extra gold?Well we will see. The manual is wrong, as the bonus is not 20% more. In most cases it is 50%, I have just made all cases 50%. The biggest change is buildings and farming, but then again these are not defining moments of a game. RM - farming is a slow process, the 50% will only make it a little better. DM - buildings will allow for tower rushing. arent we creating a new strat for them now since they can build/repair at +50% faster rather than originally at +0%? and mind it was YOU who didnt want to 'create new strats..BS..etc' and now you want them can tower rush in DM?Yes but they get shield - and someone like Shang has no real alternatives. Assy will get a bonus and Yamato has cheaper horse. These are 3 possible civs which will use cataphracts to mow down archers and not be scared of fighting in amongst guard towers. They also get LOS bonus - which will help them a lot against damn HHA. shang can simply use hha and cats. isnt that YOUR favorite combo to suggest? assy needs better than that if they were to receive a bonus, since they are archer oriented, what was wrong with getting them hha you suggested? yamato has cheaper horse but lack 1 tower shield just to be full upped. and shouldnt cataphracts be as fast as hha? is their 'double LOS of heavy cavalry' as big as the LOS of a full ranged hha?I am a bit confused to what you are saying exactly. I will return 100% accuracy as shield already makes archers weaker.
The point was to stop OP archers. On 200 pop games, archers get to critical mass and turn the game into an archer war (melee units cannot get close enough). The accuracy change was meant to stop this. However, I have given several civs slinger bonuses and made the shield better - meaning that hand-to-hand combat isn't as poor. if you say archers are OP couldnt you simply bring in the heavy cat? i dont think archers are particularly OP unless you were careless.Are you suggesting assy and shang are strong?
Both get better cataphracts. and are you suggesting assy and shang are weak?
they already have good cataphracts.All bonuses are given to help their weakness. Greek and Roman struggle in bronze because of archers - they get slinger bonus, Assy struggle in DM because they lack a cutting edge/impact unit - cataphracts are better... well civ bonuses arent supposed to be just for their weaknesses. it is supposed to give them character. i understand greek and roman need defense to archers in bronze, i suggested at least a bit better range though. how do assy struggle in DM? they got cataphracts, fast firing horse archers, heavy cats and helepolis and trireme, ballista towers, full priests, as well as the best of the best fastest jihadists. you should of seen them in aoe beta, they will take a bone up to your head and *smack* your dead. ;pGiving Egypt AE gives new strat. Please don't make me explain this again. no it does NOT. is your mentality really about DM only? or 'oh egypt dont rush'? or armored eles is all about rush? or 'im afraid to give all civ AE and Hcats'? OR now its 'oh about the cataphracts'?You lose current strats which require a lot of skill (micro mainly) to pull off. AE and Hcats is too easy. Managing scythes, archers, priests, towers etc takes a lot of micro. strats do not require micro. they require macro. even AE and Hcats need to be macro'd otherwise you would lose many to carelessness. Managing a whole lot of units and buildings can be done with macro. You can also include dragging them all along and moving them all at the same time!They will lose their current strat... if they did not lose anything they had formerly, then they did not lose their current strat.Build stables, make eles, attack. Build siege workshop, make hcats, attack. and you and any n00bs could still make a mistake or be careless and fail to do any of those or their prerequisites.It is easier to pull off than some of the other strats which require a lot of micro and not "hey, which building should I destroy from 16 tiles away?". again, you can easily be careless and think that way but fail to do so. whereas other strats, you tend to have more attention to detail because you need everything.That is the skill  that is NOT the skill! read the definition of macromanagement i had above and that definition is the dictionary denotation for in games especially RTS.Then you go to ele rushing... really? is really 'we got eles, rush' the real strat?A rush hits a wall, it is a long time before they have something to take the wall down. The defensive player can use towers/bowmen to hit hand-to-hand units etc. They can get a better eco and be ready for someone who then uses his little eco to get a stone thrower ready. I can assure you that although 1 piece of wall may come down, the defensive player will be more than capable of double walling whilst going for iron or amassing a deadly force of compies and/or cav! and you couldnt do the same and tower reach inside? or build a forward force outside surrounding the walled place, amass a force and then siege? for double wall or so yes you can still do this instead of tearing down 1 piece of wall. OR how about what if you had pulled Siege of Alesia?Last minute improvise is restricted to what resources you got - strategy gives you the resources you need, the buildings where you need them, the defensives which protect you and the attack which lets you win... last minute improvise is an immediate strategy if necessary and is not restricted etcetera. basically to pull it off you have to be often aggressive and resourceful NOT simply just to what resources you got. you can still get more and/or do more.You had hcats before they could get their eles to you? I am talking more about the competitive games where that ele rush will be all over the workshops with only a handful of cats (minus engineering and the hcat upgrade) to fight back. i was also talking about competitive games unless you were talking about non-post-iron dm, then i can group the cats quickly with ballistics and that will still do to mow down the forward marching dumbos. i would of did the same with eles and send them first as well as the cats.Er, you asked why I called them cheap. Also remember in DM what you start with. Scythes are cheap unless you forget to put 40+ villies on wood (this is where you need a strat and not to improvise ) ok you called them cheap as though they were poor in quality or use. also putting 40+ vills on wood is not a strat. any idiot could of done that. ;pI also don't get why you admit hitt hcats are OP but they must remain at the same level? They still get the bonus but it will not be as strong (but still strong). If ES released the game with 50% bonus initially I am sure many will still go for hitt because DM games are essentially ele rush followed by hcats - they have both, hcats get bonus. People would still moan "hitt are OP" because they get all units, techs. now where did i admit hitt hcats are OP? i remember along the line i only said 'purportedly' or 'supposively' they are such. i said it because the reason is the human factor. and yes they should remain at the same level because that level is originally designed there for a purpose. reducing it removes the significance and therefore defeats the purpose. if ES had released the game with 50% bonus then no one would be bitching about it. but instead they forsaw what they forsaw and made it double because at 50% wasnt significant enough and was rather undoubtly meager. also the purpose is not simply people would still moan 'hitt are OP'. it is instead so they can withstand significant extra damage (including an extra stone and stray stone flying) otherwise its just like comparing for example giving them only 1 extra HP or armor.
at least if you really want to make them 50% give it to all their siege including ballista and helepolis placed in scenario builder. but i tell you, they are better off at "Stone Thrower, Catapult, and Heavy Catapult hit points doubled."But it doesn't make sense. Ever hear of the saying "if it isn't broke don't fix it?". tell me how AE or 'elephants with light armor and siegecraft' dont go with egypt? ror broke it so it needs to be fixed ;pThey can rush with war eles (or any unit for that matter) but I am talking about more competitive games - AE will completely change the civ. Any civ with AE and Hcats are the more favourable civs on non-restricted DM games. i am also talking about more competitive games - AE will not completely change the civ but enhance it. Any civ with 'AE and Hcats' are the more favourable civs on non-restricted DM games, but do they have both? did i say give them heavy cats? (even though i think they should) did i say give everyone BOTH AE and Hcats? Keyword: ANDImprove the wheel? Why?
RoR eliminated weaknesses? No, they introduced new ones. You brought up Egypt lack AE - this is a weakness considering there was no AE in RoR. Cav is useless on RM (camel), bowmen are non-existant (slinger) and the hills, medit and conti maps bring out different weaknesses and strengths in each civ.
I would say most players who played the game from the trial throughout the the release of RoR would say the same. to make it more effective/significant/useful otherwise the wheel is broken or will break.
RoR eliminated LISTED weaknesses. Keyword: LISTED. there is no longer negative civ bonuses or penalties. for civs that lack techs is not considered a weakness because it is simply not something going against them like in aoe -30% farming penalty for persia. RoR eliminated such 'penalties'.Really? So making the right change has little thought? Considering how complex it is (different game styles, modes, teams etc) the fewer the changes the better. There can be no argument. all you have to consider is 2 things per civ, RM and DM. you dont need to worry about how they team up and pit against each other. remember this is not like aom where they began their rock, paper, scissors thing. this is about putting their 'ultimate units' to battle it out. that takes only some thought and consideration. fewer changes shows less work put into and rather thoughtless and a job not well done so why not make more changes?They don't use them because ele rush or hha take priority before centies. Centies need 2 upgrades + 1 tech, like hcats = and hcats will crush them. so if you say they dont use centurions whats wrong with getting rid of them? at least no one will really care or notice so much for that. (although then none of the babylonian class civs: babylon, hittite, persia will have centurions)No hitt were known for an early iron, but ended up getting wiped out by "the sea people". I would say they were similar in power to egypt, and again a civ not known for their military conquests but what they did in their own kingdom.
I was saying if you want realism then hitt would have no eles and no siege, being similiar to egypt (good chariots) and having early but weak iron. History will make you crazy  well everybody was wiped out by 'the sea people' and that was not the only factor. it was called the catastrophe of 1200 BC NOT the destruction of 1200 BC! scientific evidence pointed to natural disasters at the time like for example the supervolcano on crete exploded as well as its resulting tsunami also killed the minoans, the mycenaean greeks, the canaanites, etcetera every known civ in the known world. they were indeed a civ similar in power to egypt. but what you mean they were not known for their military conquests? they conquered the Hattians, Canaanites, Syrians, Hurrians, most of regional Mesopotamia and had sacked Babylon and destroyed the Mitanni. They also challenged the Egyptians at Kadesh. wtf you mean they werent known for their conquests? what they did in their own kingdom was after conquests they had to quell rebellions sometimes brutally sieging them. i know my ancient history, how about you? how can you say they werent conquerors when in fact they actually were? no eles or no siege for that matter would not be realism and how is iron supposed to be weak? they were similar to egypt as a superpower of the time but that was it. their PROMINENT forces were chariots and infantry but they definitely had what they had considering they did conquer deep into regional Mesopotamia.How much wood would a woodchuck chuck if a woodchuck could chuck wood?
I would rather say I am hesitant, all things considered  As much wood as a woodchuck would if a woodchuck could chuck wood.
How do you like that? Glad to see you are considerably hesitant and not adamant.It really doesn't matter about number, because there are so many different variables to consider.
ES forsought 50 pop - it is now 200 pop.
Maybe I shouldn't say "hitt used to have 100%, now it is 50%" - because you are confusing this as half-assed.
Old hitt = 300hp, new = 225, which is infact 25% down (i.e. they are three-quarter-assed)
At the same time standard hcats are 150 hp. 225 beats 150 - so siege war unaffected. 225 a bit easier for scythes and other melee to kill with added min range change. the number does matter and is one thing to consider and many to consider if brought to variables. you will need alot of testing to see why.
the pop difference does not matter here.
you are attempting to half-ass their bonus and the meaningfulness of their bonus.
reducing hitt bonus anywheres down is considered half-assing it.
225 beats 150 if it was one vs one. if its mass vs mass, you will always have an extra rock and a stray one to dodge making the hittite equivalant to the regular which is not the purpose. the hp bonus is designed to withstand the scythe and other melee attacking it so it can suffer less in friendly fire and hold out on their own enough to rush in something else. letting melee units kill it easier is not the point of the bonus. adding extra min range however is a natural factor that can be considered.So now your excuse is that completely valid points regarding balance should be set aside because you are unfamiliar with 200 pop? No - battles happen across the map in more than one place. Both sides test the defenses across walls etc, looking for whatever opening they can get to wiping out the other's eco (and forwards). Walling, scouting and eco are fundamental to a strong player, as is micro skills. Granted most people have different weaknesses but can be successful with a good, tailor-made strat. I would say that the competitive players on voobly, and chinese/vietnam active AoE multiplayer clients will have very good skills in all these areas. I would also say that competitive or not - there is a noticable difference in how 50 and 200 pop games play. Archers and siege suddenly become much stronger and hand-to-hand is more vunerable - can you see this too? no i am not unfamiliar with 200 pop. the pop difference explaination for this is not a complete valid point nor has anything to do with any balance. i am talking about putting all 50 or all 200 units together attacking each other in one scene including with obstacles mainly forests and cliffs blocking the way as a factor. i understand battles happen in more than one place across the map. to tell you what a scene or whatever the proper term is, see picture below.

notice the red circling across the 'scene' and the box on the minimap? try putting 200 vs 200 units inside this alone and have them all attacking. that is what i was talking about.
also again you cant say your pop is 200 from what ES had was 50 to explain how they forsought to give hittite cats double HP. that pop difference dont mean jack if you cant get in a competitive game all whatever pop units in one scene attacking all at the same time.As already stated - the theory is to water down the bonus because the unit (hcat) is OP. There are too many variables to conclude via numbers - this change needs testing first.
Also, on Palmy - I need to test the current 50% before making any changes, so no(t yet?). yeah but that theory is a fraud. wait and see how the numbers and variables test out. you will see why ES made the cat bonus doubled in the first place (and its NOT because they forsought 50 pop).200 pop...you should try it and see the diff.
Firstly, eco is stronger. You can have 80-100 villies in DM (rather than 5-10), in RM you can really boom! You can also spread out across the map after the initial exchanges (bronze rush etc).
Secondly, archers are stronger. Critical mass is a bitch! Consider 50-100 CA on RM - you can only match this with CA or compies. Cavalry, chariot etc don't come close.
Thirdly, siege is OP. Hcats are the only thing that can generate a plain grass map WITHOUT using the scenario builder . 50-100 helepolis are near impossible to beat WITHOUT hcats.
Fourthly, I am confident in saying anyone who has played 200 pop vs 50 pop will tell you the same. again im not going to explain that what ES forsought the hitt cat bonus being doubled has any relation to your population theory. it shouldnt be a case unless you can fit all 200 vs 200 in one 'scene' like i described above and NOT simply only across the map.
and btw do not forget there are fortifications with double HP to coincide with this as well.Standard is n00bish - any and evey n00b knows how to do it. It is the safest way to play because it is simple. Try getting these guys to play random civs..."can we restart I got Babylon"... a standard is not n00bish. it is a set high example. any and every n00b may know how to do it but fail to do it correctly and falter easily. the safest way to play is one of the two but not both. now if it was only eles war or only siege war then thats n00bish. and a random civ doesnt matter. you can play a random civ and achieve with what they got as well. the response would be "no we will not restart whats wrong with babylon anyways? they got horse archer, heavy cats and super ballista towers."Not give everyone AE and Hcats 
n00bs love max damage, hp and area damage. It is just the n00b way. now we are talking about the DM standard or that thereof regularly considered. why are you talking about everyone getting AE and Hcats?
are you kidding me? they do not because they suck at achieving it alone. DM experts regularly love to slug it out with max damage and everything. isnt that what DM is all about?Again, simple. Any n00b can play. Very common setting. if this is simply 'Any n00b can play' then why were you the one who suggested it? i say any n00b can play because it is all one unit.I wouldn't say they are combo, but a "one after the other". AE early, hcats late. so you send them in individually alone? yours is bound to suck. i would send them in all together AE in front, hcats right behind them.Every civ should have a weakness. Some are gold-hungry (no chariot), some have crappy techs or ages. It gives the civ character, and a means to defeat them. every civ shouldnt have a weakness. they should have exploits only. being gold-hungry, crappy techs or ages is not considered a weakness. weaknesses doesnt give civs character, it actually degrades their character and penalizes them. ror thankfully eliminated such weaknesses.
you also cant consider it a means to defeat them otherwise thats like saying 'i totally owned this civ by having my starting at post-iron and making them start in the stone age.'Well I will mod myself a bigdaddy car and destroy these pretenders 
Again - the hitt have a OP unit, it should be watered down slightly. really? i wouldnt be surprised these angry peasants with pitchforks snuck up on you before you did that and 'boned' you to death ;p
there is a right way to water them down rather then defeating what they are for such as increasing their min range more rather than defraud everyone by reducing them from double HP.I am just forcing a little weakness on the champion of DM - hitt. thats not a little weakness you are forcing. thats a fraud!Yes I can change this if the Egypt strat is nuked with the new gold changes. I have been thinking about possible changes and the best one is to change 33% hp for a chariots get +x pierce bonus. Not sure on the value. I don't want it to impact RM too much, so the pierce bonus should still have the same effectiveness when playing a "archer war" in RM with 33%hp bonus.
This will help scythes in DM, seeing as they don't get the shield. I want to hold out on tech tree changes. ok you are not to eliminate their HP bonus and swap it for false shields. that is not the right idea. you will eventually have to go for tech tree changes.You mentioned cataphracts, and how what I do creates new strat - so confusion perhaps?
No egypt will not have cavalry. Cataphracts will have LOS bonus double that of hcav. HHA will have speed, with only palmy camels capable of catching them. BUT remember that cataphracts bonus + only being fractionaly slower means that everytime a HHA stops to fire a cheeky shot, the cataphract gets closer!
Scythes are meant to fall like toy soldiers. They are cheap so you can just keep pumping them out throughout the game. no i did not mention cataphracts. i was talking about equipping egyptian scythe chariots with 'bronze shield, iron shield and tower shield' i said nothing anywheres about cataphracts until you said it out of nowhere having to do with nothing. your response was also 'new strat' which also was out of nowhere and has nothing to do with fully equipping egyptian scythe chariots. i think you sir are distracted and no doubtly confused yourself since you are talking nonsense to what we were actually talking about.
back to topic: scythes are not meant to fall like toy soldiers. they are meant as a means of fast trample damage especially vs priests. but the scythes cant get to the priests if they are easily shot down by towers or archers despite racing through them. egyptian scythes are supposed to be the best but will need the shields for protection.!!! You have never heard of the Shang problem? Shang rule on 35 cost, 200 start food. Assy and Yammy are close behind on the original pre-patched AoE. yes i heard of the shang problem. i called it 'shang-hai' and i can still easily beat them especially with assy.? Weakness doesn't mean handicap. It means a certain missing unit or tech from the tech tree. Persia had a handicap for some reason (maybe ES thought hunting was really really good?).
I am not handicapping any civ. I am happy to allow for weaknesses, however. i didnt say weakness means handicap. a weakness listed is considered a penalty. a missing unit or tech is considered a handicap. persia had a weakness for an obvious reason likely ES based it off of historical because unfortunately the land in persia was very poor for farming. a hunting bonus was used to supplement this but eventually when ror came out, ES decided persia should not be the only one penalized just like what the readme manual says "Persian civilization no longer has a farming penalty."Well, I can say Persian and Mace do not suck. I like both, and I would only hate being Persia if playing against Assy. Against Yamato I don't mind (camel vs cav).
Persia and Mace do miss wheel - but it is very n00bish to say they suck because there villagers can run around a farm as fast. yes but did anyone say they suck? i already said i hear them sometimes moaning about it, especially when the time is mid-bronze to iron. i usually agree afterwards if i were playing the same with them.
persia and mace do miss wheel and theyre villagers are helpless compared to others with wheel or rushers as a result. they dont suck at least not their military but they lack in appeal and playability (and dependability and reliability for that matter).*sigh* AoE isn't real. Let us pretend that Roggan and his friends are fictional and get on with the game  aoe may not be real. but why wont you give them the wheel?That is a really good idea. I can replace them with Israelites  you do that and everyone will say your patch is CRAPOn DM just build houses along the edges. In RM it is hard to get 200 pop, and if you do you should be able to find the room. Try watching some 200 pop games on GameRanger and Voobly - spacing for houses isn't a problem (unless you are playing tiny map!). well of course you can build houses enough up to 200. i figure that should change since its 'ES made 50', 'YOU made 200'.I have good idea about Eles archers. Eles archers are taller than Horses. They could have 8 range (11). It's bigger realism in the game.
Yes Eles Archers are very good towers. towers, eles archers and priests already have an extended extra range like the game info says. that is why if you use an archer with 9 range to attack an 8 range tower, the tower can still reach you. same way for eles archers and priests.[This message has been edited by volume (edited 11-27-2009 @ 05:21 AM).]
|