All Activity

Need more info on why Marian Reforms is strong in 1v1. The main draw is still onagars I would say, not the ranked up troops since you can already get second rank troops from the castrum in second age. And you have to put up with the economic restructuring that reforms bring too. I would very much like current siege pop left as is. Some more interesting general siege techs would be nice though, like something to increase splash damage or add a burning effect like we have on Iberian fire cav. Honestly it would be cool if we had a return of the A23 style roman scorpio that was packed on a donkey instead of in a cart like everybody else's. Maybe give it a little differentiation like make it weaker and cheaper than the normal bolt thrower but have it more manoeuvrable. Kind of like the abus gun the Ottomons have in Age III.

I think this is an animation issue; the healing animation is rather long although the health gain is instant. If the unit moves slightly (not run away like your jav) while the healing animation is playing, the healer is still stuck in the healing animation which doesn't involve its feet. Therefore it looks like gliding. It's nothing major though, healing mechanism is still working as intended

The Ptol library is ok as it is; it is neither op nor completely useless. If you know that your enemy is not going to push early, you can fly P2 with just 3 forges then leave all military techs to P3 after you have the library. In terms of absolute numbers of resources, you are saving a lot. However, you are delaying yourself with the extra build power investment and the delays, so you would be at a disadvantage if you get attacked. This means the Library is the most useful when you are up against another turtle player, in which case you aim for wtf tech

I get that it sounds that way, but the way we did it* actually gives the player more agency while making the library not quite as powerful as a full p2 variant, but still more useful as in vanilla. (* we put a tech for each "category" of techs in the library; "Gather scrolls on military knowledge", "Gather ... economic ..." and "Gather ... general ...", where each of them applies the reduction to the relevant area. That way, the player can choose what is more important right now/for his gameplan. But each unlock tech in the library takes 60s i think, so by the time you got all three youre already in p3, at which point the library is as useful as in vanilla)

@TheCJ @BreakfastBurrito_007 Yeah, I’m not sure the library as it currently exists—a straight resource reduction—even makes sense. It might make sense to change it a bit. Making it the same but behind other techs that you have to research just sounds like making changes to make changes.

library in p2 would make the p3 tech in the cc cheaper, no? thats op (We moved library p2 in historical patch and had to nerf it by adding three techs inside that you have to get first to get any reduction, because instantly building a library in p2 and getting a discount on every single forge tech, all p2 and p3 eco upgrades, the p3 upgrade and w2f is pretty op)

meme.mp4

Does anyone know how I register the command in the interface? I mean, similar to the patrol, garrison and guard icons.

I have found the replay. I thought it was a late join or so. But I have the full replay. About at min 18 2 healers begin this gliding-healing. commands.txt

I agree, I just want to make sure that we don't go from it being something that's almost never built to being something that's always built and at a set time in an optimal build order. I think having situation dependent gameplay choices is essential, so if its too much of a gimme then it has less gameplay enrichment value.

It's not very useful in p3. By the time you build it you've already researched all the eco techs and basically all the military techs. If you delay doing techs then your eco is way too slow and you're also vulnerable to early pushes from your enemy. So, right now, the library is basically only useful for (1) getting a cheaper wtf, which is a clunky and annoying way to make a less commonly researched tech cheaper, (2) getting a cheaper glorious expansion cheaper, which is, again, a clunky and annoying way to make a tech that is almost never researched cheaper, and (3) make techs affordable on ultra low resource maps. I'm not sure how the library should be priced. Right now it usually doesn't make sense to build. There should be some tradeoff calculation where it sometimes makes sense and it sometimes doesn't Right now, that calculation is almost entirely absent.

During spectating I saw that some healers where healing while gliding. I don't know if they actually healed or had the animation running while they where walking or so. I can not reproduce this. I tried: Healing while different units walk away. The healer stops. 50 skirm + 10 healers vs 50 skirm + 10 healers: All stoned the healing process when units walk out of range. The walking begins. Capturing a building in a group This is what I saw: healing_glide.mp4 This is my attempt: healing_glide_mine.mp4

Colonization tech. in the first phase and put a more coherent price on it for the first phase. Elephants. I am against elephants in phase 2 except Maurya. Siege Tech, Reducing the metal cost is not that expensive to reduce the rest of the cost, unless the goal is to keep the cost low to speed up gameplay.I'm more into long games than short ones. There should be a mode for short games of 15-20 minutes. CC is very weak in P3, it would need to be significantly improved with civic technologies.It would also be nice if the Ram had slow development and upgrades like in AoE. I enjoy the technical improvements and the arms race( evolutive/adaptation) in strategy games.

Yes.They hide units with a command in the forest and grasslands and can be ambushed or simply to hide. LoS thing is influenced by AoE II where the game is more difficult due to a slow start. And at the beginning it is slow and the low LoS makes you blind in the map, since you only depend on scout, because civilians have very low LoS ( line of sight). Nomad starts are better in AoE II.

What you do before the reforms plays a role. So if you are training spearmen, they don't turn into legionaries, but conscript spearmen. So if you want the reforms to be more of a power spike, you will want to train swordsmen before it, and if you want to retain your eco, train more spears before it.

I like the idea with ptol library in p2, but I feel like maybe a slight cost addition and significant build time addition is necessary. Ideally it can be buildable in p2 but not something that can always be built immediately upon reaching p2. It should be a challenge to time its construction between eco or military techs in order to maximize value.

Interesting analysis of the economic impact. I have seen some players use it akin to the revolt option in Age III or Flemish revolution in Age II, basically a power spike for an existing army which they then throw at you. And unfortunately not everything works correctly currently, eh the missing attack animation on auxiliary lancers and the legionary keyword for first cohort champions. The second is more significant as it impairs the synergy between centurions and the sword champions. The main attraction though of reforms has been the onagar, which honestly gets let down by the drastic shift in eco and the need to often restructure that eco so you can keep doing things, often inefficiently. So while I like the concept flavour, I do wish Onagars where separate and paywalled like champions are rather than having to mess up my entire eco every time just for the option of building them

Aslan quit a rated 1v1 without resigning commands.txt metadata.json

Hmm, probably increase per alpha would help us gauge other interesting things. But 300 seems a stretch. But there's no way to tell.

I'd guess 300 a week and 50 per day. But my guess is as good as yours. The development over the alphas would be interesting.

@Classic-Burger I use 25-30. Atleast at my level, (1400, whatever that might mean) it works against enemies. You can snipe away cavalry, and a few spearmen close by is easy counter to melee cav civs. You can camp around the enemy with archers and elephant. But the sight and vision that you mentioned would be fun, but I think it's not completely fair since you can't tilt the camera to ground level to look at the forest floor. Hiding watch towers is interesting too, but easier to spot. Is Praetorians a different game?

Hmm, I see. I meant the number of players only. How many would you put the number of players at? I'm guessing it's about 50 per week and 30 in a day?

No, only of the games that I played. One can not really extrapolate from that, because on different times there's a different number of players. I'd need a long log of the lobby chat. This has been done afaik, but I haven't seen it. As I heard during covid there were more players (I had a big break then). But since I play (a15/a16) it's about the same number of players in my perception.

I think it can be done with a good number of archers. I don't think it would be effective; I remember using Kushite archers behind a line of spears and pikes. But making a "Rush" without riders and without melee infantry to hunt lumberjacks seems difficult to me. And expecting the enemy to have no cavalry. Unlike AoE, cavalry is more prevalent in this game. Skirmish cavalry is quickly available. This is where you have to do some work to differentiate all the missile CS units. In the current game, cavalry is the best option to rush/raid farms and lumberjacks (warehouses). It would also help to nerf the LoS and introduce technologies to improve it again. This would make the enemy feel claustrophobic from not seeing anything and having more blind spots. It would be interesting to be able to hide archers and skimishers as it happened in Praetorians.

Ideally, there should be different ways for archers to be good, not just one way. Changing the subject, the champion pikes need to be better, I never chose pikes in a Seleucid reform.