Leaderboard

I see your point, and I agree that this alpha brought more variety and dynamics in team games compared to older versions. I also like that captures add another layer of tactics. Also I think a lot of strategy of today were usable in past too. It more about how people play and communicate. I remember 2 big army in phase 2 could take a CC even with 20 citizen troop inside even in previous alpha. My concern is mostly about late game (Phase 3) when some strong buildings like CCs or fortresses can still fall relatively quickly to capture. In those cases, I feel destruction (with siege or units) should remain the primary way, otherwise capture sometimes feels too cheap compared to the investment in defending and upgrading. Tower seems annoying to use (put men inside etc) for a low result and easy capture. 3 or 5 men can't give enough capture resistance. But you can tell me we can obstruct access to the tower, it true and I do. I will try do more tower for have an opinion Maybe the solution is not to make captures impossible, but to adjust ratios depending on the building type and upgrade level. Civilian buildings and light towers could remain easy to capture, but core military buildings (CC, fortresses, barracks with garrison) should require much bigger numbers unless the attacker has already crippled them. If you play a civ with hero elefant you can't have a CC with hero garnison. That way, we could keep the current dynamics you enjoy (more tactical choices, not always relying on siege), while still ensuring that capturing a well-defended CC in late game doesn’t become too much of a shortcut. What do you think of this middle ground? Just run on cc and then capture all building is annoying. It should be exceptional situation. if you invade an enemy without army to defend or refusing the fight, you still can capture and destroy some building in my point of view, they enemy will be hurt and he don't recovery easy. He still has to micro for garnison some men in the important building, just less. It open also the strategy of counter attack in some way. also i said " here’s always the option of heavily damaging a building to force the garrison out before attempting to capture it. " with some military tech, the cc it easy to destroy if your opponent have no army. I will add in the most of situation, except if you retard spam them, palisade give a fake feeling of security (and that's normal for the low cost of ressource invest), they are easy to destroy if you right clic with an entire army on it. I like a lot turtle and protect my building with other building for win some time.

100 slingers do the job if no defense army

If/when melee infantry champions become useful, these will need a massive nerf.

That was the case in previous alphas. It forced on the 'get sieges and attack' build. This alpha we see a wider variety of builds and team strategies in TGs. It also introduce a interesting balance between optimizing fields, and having to protect your CC with a bit with other buildings (A cc surrounded by fields, have no reasons to be hard to capture). Your base is not protected by default against an army if you have no defenders. You can still build defenses (palisades a few towers are rather cheap and can help tones) that will give much more time to get allied defenders to your base. There is a wider skill gap now (and that isn't some clicky boring mechanic) about defending tactics. You need to put best units in buildings, you need to know how to play with the greed of your enemy who'll try to capture your buildings... I love turteling this alpha, because buildings are very strong, but it stays dynamic and interesting, due to not having every single building having to be rammed down. Overall when capturing was impossible, game stalled much more often and that wasn't so fun. Sieges are useful in many situation, but are just no longer mandatory to take out a CC if you have much more superior forces in enemy base.

Please no, one thread arguing in circles about one random unit is bad enough, we don't need another one....

The problem with you is that we have to argue with someone that doesnt understand that 1 singleplayer is an entirely valid way to play the game if they're having fun 2 people that dont play often still have a brain and can compare unit stats and costs 3 the game should be fun for everyone, not just ValihrAnt and borg Sure, why not make it more expensive than any normal champion, after all its already weaker. Very logical... And then you would have the same problem with athenian marines and spartan hoplites, as after that change they would be cheaper and more powerful than fanatics. Iberians were famous for metalworking aswell, one of the most prominent roman sword designs was inspired by them.

Let's wrap it up with a classic for now.

OP AI Bot? Scary black mirror world we are heading in to