Leaderboard

I mean, which June was not specified

Here's an idea for buffing sentry and guard towers that I tried in one of my own modding experiments and found incredibly fun: give them an aura that slightly increases the movement speed of friendly units. This is meant to represent the policing and infrastructure functions that a small local garrison under arms can perform. They keep the roads clear, break up fights, and give directions, enhancing the efficiency of the local economy. The effect of this was to incentivize building out a network of sentry towers across your territory, and especially around work sites to speed up production. These naturally also became a defensive asset against raiders, especially if you strategically upgraded some to guard towers, but (at least in my experiments) the density of towers needed for efficient production was less than the density needed to fully protect against raids. But I still felt it shifted the approach to static defense away from the spoke and hub paradigm, where a CC or Fortress anchors the defenses and economy of a big chunk of territory. If you want a further layer of intrigue, one could also give static defense a farming and metal mining debuff aura, representing the graft of the sentries. (This should also apply to CCs or Fortresses.) It could even slow research and unit production. Then you have an interesting push and pull where you should intentionally leave some gaps in the tower network. Now, I would be remiss not to disclose that this was in the context of an experiment where I lowered the max pop to around 100 IIRC, along with other changes. I'm not sure the performance implications for a full sized game...

@real_tabasco_sauce Most agree that A26 was reasonably balanced, units, buildings, even civs... If your changes introduces new game-play opportunities, I think you should consider making sure your suggested changes are consistent. First let me remind you that I don't try to just be negative as I already said I liked the melee re-balance, and in 26.8, I like the cc arrow cap that open up for more rushing opportunities in 'mid game', (min 7-12). My own 100females squadrons are a bit more threaten then before which is fair. However I do regret how 26.8 wasn't though out much and clearly was pushed to fix the unbalances introduced by non-random arrows. If for reasons non-random arrows will not be reverted despite the pushbacks, I would still like to suggest give back a role to towers. After thoughts, nerfing them was maybe good to avoid stalling turtle game. But now they are just always a bad investment. Here is my line of reasoning: if the maximum power dps of a tower is nerfed by that much (reminder garrison contribute to -50% dps in 26.8), the associated cost of building the towers or upgrading them should have been scaled in consequences. Here some ideas: Sentry towers build cost reverted back to 100wood, or even lowered to 80wood. Share Carrier Pigeon tech for towers. Sentries, Crenellations techs cost at least cost -50% since they provide -50% dps from before. Han great tower and even Iberian tower need adjusted default arrow count as they are a big investments for half the max dps now. Thanks for reading.

For me (on Windows) the shortcuts to train units are the keys z, x, c, v, and shift-clicking to queue up multiple at once works just fine.

[English below] Actuellement, le jeu est divisé en trois phases: - La phase des villages. - La phase des villes. - La phase des cités. Le problème avec ce système, c'est qu'il est centré sur le concept de développement urbain et sur le développement des grandes civilisations méditerranéennes. C'était déjà pas très pertinent pour les civilisations telles que les Gaulois et les Britons, mais ça va le devenir encore moins si on ajoute des peuples nomades comme les Scythes. Je propose un système un peu plus neutre: Ascension / Expansion / Apogée Ascension : Cette phase initiale évoque le début du développement de la civilisation, où elle s'élève de ses modestes débuts vers des horizons plus vastes. Cela peut symboliser la période où les fondations sont posées et où les premières avancées sont réalisées. Expansion : Cette phase représente la période où la civilisation s'étend et prospère, colonisant de nouveaux territoires, élargissant son influence et sa puissance. C'est une étape de croissance et d'exploration. Apogée : La phase finale, l'apogée, suggère le sommet de la civilisation, où elle atteint son plein potentiel en termes de culture, de technologie et de pouvoir. C'est le moment où la civilisation rayonne de sa plus grande splendeur. The game is currently divided into three phases: - Village phase. - Town phase. - City phase. The problem with this system is that it focuses on the concept of urban development and the development of the great Mediterranean civilizations. It wasn't relevant enough for civilizations such as the Gauls and Britons, but it's going to become even less so if we add nomadic peoples like the Scythians. I propose a more neutral system: Ascent / Expansion / Zenith Ascent (or ascension): This initial phase evokes the beginning of the development of civilisation, where it rises from its modest beginnings to broader horizons. It can symbolise the period when the foundations are laid and the first advances are made. Expansion: This phase represents the period when civilisation expands and prospers, colonising new territories and extending its influence and power. This is a stage of growth and exploration. Zenith: The final phase, the apogee, suggests the pinnacle of civilisation, where it reaches its full potential in terms of culture, technology and power. This is the moment when civilisation radiates its greatest splendour.

I think this is a great idea. Bigger houses should need less time for producing women. That would be fair for civ balance. Moreover, reducing women training time from houses would give an alternative way to boom. I would go as far as: - 25sec from small houses - 18sec from big houses - 12sec from apartment

ADD THE ILLYRIANS