I also have another idea that comes to mind quite often: when defeat is clearly inevitable, Petra should type “gg” and resign. Ragequit behavior could be added as well. Watching it try to rebuild from scratch somewhere on the map with just 4 units against my full army is a bit of a waste of time.   You’re welcome. Here’s a new attempt: 1v3 on the same map that I shared earlier. This is the first time I’ve won a 1v3 on Very Hard. The Petras had random civs and random behavior: two Germans and one Carthage. The Carthage Petra could have been much more effective here if it had built siege ships.    commands.txt metadata.json

As per the Terms of Use of the multiplayer lobby registering multiple accounts is prohibited. Please contact me via private message so we can sort out which of these two accounts to delete again.

I definitely agree with this. Even just the ability (as you mentioned above this) to locate a tower or fortress and go around it would greatly improve it. Other thoughts I have: it wastes time killing women when there are more important targets near by, it never targets high-priority targets like Siege Rams, Heroes, and ranged units, and (as I’ve definitely said in other topics), it never upgrades it’s old sentry towers.

@Stan`

Yep, that diagram shows what happens in circle placement (I was doing some diagrams a time ago to visualise dynamics.) As I mentioned in another post, I think this is similar to football formations. In a circle, players on the borders most of the time face early pressure and frequent 2v1 situations, at least in the 1111 vs 2222 setup. But with random groups, river or stronghold dynamics are different. That's why I avoid playing circle placement, or at least I make variations like 2v2v2v2 or FFA. Almost always, they send me to the border; most players want to be in the pocket, because the border in circle placement is like that football position that receives more tackles.  The game has so much possibilities worth of being explored