Leaderboard

I am pretty sure I have seen some of these arguments being used for adding stables. This not only contradicts the thesis of the thread but implies that building footprints and the fact that being scouted are actually side effects. What about house footprints? I am sure at times, that's an inconvenience too. The point isn't to create an autochess. Scouting introduces a new dynamic which is desired because the objective isn't linear gameplay. And I disagree that your opponent finding out that you are massing cav is actually a failure in game design. An equally valid stance is believing that not being able to scout stables gives an unfair advantage to the attacker and overpowers early cav strats. Ask any AoE2 player and they would probably agree with the latter. tl:dr; are these actually problems with stables?

Melee cavalry will perish instantly to your spearman but will massacre ranged infantry. Ranged cavalry will dance-troll your melee infantry but will perish to ranged infantry if outnumbered. Slingers and archers counter skirmish cavalry, so consider mixing a few ranged units into your infantry army, and put melee units ahead of your ranged units to scare of the cavalry. My recommendation is to try a 1:1 melee to ranged ratio first, then adapt this ratio to whatever suits the best.

Hi everyone new release of HC has just happened check out https://www.moddb.com/mods/hyrule-conquest/downloads and download HC node bases plus hotfix 0.12. Have a nice day.

Cav aren't as OP as you're suggesting here. It sounds like the problem is that you need to work more ranged units into your army and not just spam out spearmen. tbh, I usually have zero or few cav in my army. I do perfectly fine fighting opponents who use cav, as long as I have a balance of units and get some military upgrades.

The mercenary cavalry are known to be difficult to defend in a25. I played Borg- with Carthaginians recently. In contrast to the "conventional" way of building walls to defend the base, Borg- used active attacking strategies to gain an upper hand in the game. Here I attached two interesting games. The first one is very interesting with an unexpected ending. Borg- used the Ptolemies and rushed me with camels. He was strong in the early game and leading the game with double population of mine. Remarkably, I was able to hold the game and eventually fought back and won the game. It is rare to win vs Borg-, so I am quite proud of this game. In the second one, Borg- used Maurya. He adopted a very aggressive strategy and gave me large pressure all the way in the game. I was able to defend and mass some sword cavalry. But eventually I lost. It is a very interesting game, which shows how to fight the Carthaginians with an active attacking strategy. Borg- vs cl2488.zip

no, cheaper than barrack. I think seeing the building does ruin surprise, but adds value to scouting the enemy. There's also nothing to stop you from training some cav from the CC. Def keep the stables, and give Persians skirm and spear cav in p1.

I am for removing stables and putting cav back into barracks. Problems with stables: 1. Wastes space and nerfs cav strategies. If the enemy sees that you have stables then they know for sure you are doing cav, ruining the element of surprise. Also it makes switching between inf and cav and back too difficult. 2. Stables themselves are a liability. They not only cost more resources and time to build but also are easy to capture. Furthermore you don't always have enough space to build them especially when the host picks a pizza map

Buenos días o tardes; -Avances en unidades mayas del Protoclásico(de antes del 1 a.C). Unidades; -¿Qué opinan ustedes? Disculpen las molestias*

Then don't chase him, get your own cav

It's nice that the game is rich in every aspect, but chasing cavalry all day spoils the fun of the game and is a waste of time for me. Immediate inference in a game with cavalry, waste of time. The mercenaries not working and the game turning to cavalry only wars is killing my motivation to continue playing this game. I miss the old 0AD.

Nah, just me. Sorry. I find it hard to answer such questions.

Just watched the vid from MysticJim, stellar job @Langbart. A suggestion is to implement a mnemonic device between the position of the item on the buildmenu on the right and the keyboard. Like aoe4 does for example:

Related, it might be nice if there was a civ bonus that let players build their players build in allied territory. This could be in the form where one civ can build in any allied territory or where one civ lets any ally build in their own territory. This could make for some interesting strategies where a team can push really hard on the enemy because of decreased spam walk distance.

my 9th 0AD youtube vid pls like and subscribe ———— zxphxr (1223) vs supriyadi (1280) ———— send me ur replays to make videos of: zephyramethyst1@gmail.com

I really like this a lot^

I would like to share and discuss this way of booming with other players:

Sunday has rolled around again! Time for some cavalry charges!

Even though I made 100 spearmen infantry during one game, my opponent killed them all with only 20-30 cavalry. This style of play is nothing but spam. I think the cavalry stables should be removed As on the A23, the cavalry must come out of the barracks.